Faith alone

14,425 Views | 393 Replies | Last: 51 min ago by tk111
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?

I have no issues with this
Question if I may

Do most Reformed/Calvinists believe as you do that sanctification is a synergistic process?

Thanks.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Quo Vadis?
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?


Belief lived


Even better

Given that I really think Protestants have a misrepresentation regarding our doctrine on works.

I don't know any Catholic who believes they can work their way into heaven.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quo Vadis? said:

FTACo88-FDT24dad said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?


Belief lived


Even better

Given that I really think Protestants have a misrepresentation regarding our doctrine on works.

I don't know any Catholic who believes they can work their way into heaven.
Agree. Sadly, they are taught that by their pastors. I was taught that growing up in the Baptist church. Had a bunch of Catholic friends and occasionally went to Mass. Never believed what my pastors were saying.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?

I have no issues with this
Question if I may

Do most Reformed/Calvinists believe as you do that sanctification is a synergistic process?

Thanks.

Yes sir
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?

I have no issues with this
Question if I may

Do most Reformed/Calvinists believe as you do that sanctification is a synergistic process?

Thanks.

Yes sir


That is good and welcome. I can live with the uncertainty of how regeneration occurs.

And if you give me a heads up on when you come in for Aggie baseball, I may be able to get you some tickets.

Predestined of course.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?

I have no issues with this
Question if I may

Do most Reformed/Calvinists believe as you do that sanctification is a synergistic process?

Thanks.

Yes sir


That is good and welcome. I can live with the uncertainty of how regeneration occurs.

And if you give me a heads up on when you come in for Aggie baseball, I may be able to get you some tickets.

Predestined of course.

The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

dermdoc said:

10andBOUNCE said:

Quo Vadis? said:

Do you think we can agree on a working definition of "faith" as "belief influencing behavior"?

I have no issues with this
Question if I may

Do most Reformed/Calvinists believe as you do that sanctification is a synergistic process?

Thanks.

Yes sir


But do they? If pressed, are they truly going to agree that they chose to stay in a state of grace?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm guessing we may have a different order and definition of when and how we become justified perhaps. Leading us back to Faith Alone in our continuing circle.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

I'm guessing we may have a different order and definition of when and how we become justified perhaps. Leading us back to Faith Alone in our continuing circle.


A continuing circle indeed.

I guess the thing to do is think of the foundation of your belief and go there first. You have said this is total depravity. Challenge that against original sin. As I said earlier, I think original sin describes what we experience far better than the ceveats that total depravity has to create to make sense. Sacrificing oneself for others not being an objectively good act should lead one to question the doctrine. I'll be curious at what you find.

Wish you well and God bless.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Banned said:

10andBOUNCE said:

I'm guessing we may have a different order and definition of when and how we become justified perhaps. Leading us back to Faith Alone in our continuing circle.


A continuing circle indeed.

I guess the thing to do is think of the foundation of your belief and go there first. You have said this is total depravity. Challenge that against original sin. As I said earlier, I think original sin describes what we experience far better than the ceveats that total depravity has to create to make sense. Sacrificing oneself for others not being an objectively good act should lead one to question the doctrine. I'll be curious at what you find.

Wish you well and God bless.

I will indeed and hope you have a good week.

Once heard someone say, who taught your young children to yell "mine!" when playing with their toys? I certainly didn't; these little boogers are selfish right outta the womb
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

The Banned said:

10andBOUNCE said:

I'm guessing we may have a different order and definition of when and how we become justified perhaps. Leading us back to Faith Alone in our continuing circle.


A continuing circle indeed.

I guess the thing to do is think of the foundation of your belief and go there first. You have said this is total depravity. Challenge that against original sin. As I said earlier, I think original sin describes what we experience far better than the ceveats that total depravity has to create to make sense. Sacrificing oneself for others not being an objectively good act should lead one to question the doctrine. I'll be curious at what you find.

Wish you well and God bless.

I will indeed and hope you have a good week.

Once heard someone say, who taught your young children to yell "mine!" when playing with their toys? I certainly didn't; these little boogers are selfish right outta the womb


You don't have to tell me! They can be ruthless…

And then they melt your heart when they walk over to their sibling and help them with no prompting, receiving nothing in return and they didn't even know you were there to witness it.

So total depravity? I don't think so. But a fallen human nature (fallen meaning corrupted, but human meaning still made in God's image) seems to fit. We're far more selfish than we are selfless. Our selfless deeds can never make up for our selfish ones. We need something bigger than ourselves the fix us… but we are capable of thinking about others for the sake of the other and not just ourselves.

ETA: I think the first time I heard this was from Focus on the Family. Great Protestant apostolate. It was used as a rebuttal to the naturalist, atheists who said kids had to be taught how to do bad things, and if uncorrupted, they would be very moral beings…. And it's all BS.
Howdy, it is me!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here's where I get stuck with the idea that we choose: why some of us and not others?

What is different about us that some of us choose and others do not? Are we all fallen to different degrees? Are some of us smarter? Is it because some of us were evangelized better? Did God reveal Himself more effectively?

And, at the end of the day, the responsibility for these differences could be put upon God (He could have made me smarter, put me in a different family, revealed Himself to a more effective degree, etc.); so in the end, it's still "His fault" that some of us will perish.

This way also seems at least as equally unfair as the unfairness some like to attribute to the doctrine of Election.

(I don't know that I'm necessarily looking for anyone to provide an answer to this comment; just putting my thoughts out there.)
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Banned said:

I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
Great post. One of the problems I have with the Reformed/Calvinist view of election is why are there not more "elect" in non Christian dominated societies/countries?

It sure seems like faith and belief is associated with Christian exposure which makes an argument for free will.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hadn't thought about it as evidence of free will until you said that. Hard to argue against it.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Banned said:

I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
OK Im hopping on this thread super late to get off the one on the politics board so I know I'm gonna end up re-hashing previous discussions...sorry, I'll go back and read more as I have time.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves.

Eh I can get on board with this to some degree, but TD, which can also be described as "wholly defiled" focuses on the our condition as a result of sin. The most important aspect of the doctrine of total depravity is that it is impossible for any one of us to meet God's standard on our own by living sinlessly like Christ did. The sermon on the mount should be jaw-dropping for anyone that thinks they can. There's more to TD, including the "inability" part, but I want to address the difficult hurdle that many many people express on this issue that you talk about in the second half of your post. It is very hard for many to accept that that there are people completely untouched by the gospel, and that's not bad in the sense that it should be a spur to missions.

The great commission (Matt 28:16-20) makes it clear that Christ followers should spread the gospel to those that haven't heard. By default this means that there are unreached peoples - the ordained engine of the gospel making its way to these unreached people is by disciples going out into the world and spreading the truth.

Romans 10:9 - "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." I will not deny the plausibility of the miraculous means of God intervening in a completely unreached person to save them, but without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation. The fact is that the gospel has not and will not be heard and believed by many people on earth and they will not be saved. It should be deeply saddening, but we should not let this warp our understanding of who God is.

The key is understanding our state and this seems to be where people have trouble. We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator, whether we claim to know it or not (except this is also where your pointing out Paul's statements about everyone having an innate knowledge of God comes into play). We don't set the terms. Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice. There is no injustice or unfairness for those that die without ever hearing the gospel, despite its painful reality. Grace is Christ standing in our place at that judgement and is an unimaginably amazing gift.

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace. But that's not how grace works. It is a gift and always has been since Christ chose his first disciples from among fisherman and tax collectors. You weren't just given "advantages," you were given a blessing that others will never get. That should rightfully be a motivator for us to obey the great commission.

tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

The Banned said:

I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
Great post. One of the problems I have with the Reformed/Calvinist view of election is why are there not more "elect" in non Christian dominated societies/countries?

It sure seems like faith and belief is associated with Christian exposure which makes an argument for free will.
I'm not sure where the argument is here...are you suggesting that salvation should be normally and equally distributed geographically for doctrines of grace to be true?

...and you're looking at it from the perspective of our current little spot in history. What about the first century? There were only believers in and in the immediate vicinity of the Roman Empire. What made the bubble bigger?

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Counterpoint: all of the warnings against hell are made to Christians. The NT scriptures are silent about those outside the Church, the people you call "unreached".

Also - while Christ did absolutely provide a means for the forgiveness of sins (plural), the atonement wasn't just about individual wrongdoing, but about the residual taint of Sin (singular) in the world: the corruption that was like a disease. He took away the Sin (singular) of the world. The camp of Israel was a purified place from Sin, maintained by regular blood in the annual atonement, that enabled God to both dwell among the people and be approached by them. The Torah is like a sin-management system.

I think contra the individualistic approach given here, we have to understand the huge undercurrent of people-groups in the NT. The once-for-all atonement purified the world from Sin, which extended that access to God from the Israelites or those who had access to the Temple to all mankind. That's why the great commission doesn't say "teach each person" but "teach all nations".

This doesn't take away from the aspect of salvation which is individual, or the judgment which is individual, but it does give a parallel current that we must pay attention to -- especially when reading St Paul's works, which focus on this aspect in a unique way.

So when we say - "without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation" - I think we need to be super careful.


Quote:

We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator...Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice.
Eh, that's not what it says though. it says all have sinned, and all died. The wages of sin are death.

St Paul - when explicitly talking about both Jews and non-Jews - says "God 'will repay each person according to what they have done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew."


There's no conflict between the mercy and justice of God. His mercy is perfectly just, and His justice is perfectly merciful.

Quote:

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace.
This is likewise confused. It isn't about our view about opportunity. It is understanding that everyone receives grace, sufficient for their salvation, which is why God is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful.
Howdy, it is me!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

The Banned said:

I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
OK Im hopping on this thread super late to get off the one on the politics board so I know I'm gonna end up re-hashing previous discussions...sorry, I'll go back and read more as I have time.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves.

Eh I can get on board with this to some degree, but TD, which can also be described as "wholly defiled" focuses on the our condition as a result of sin. The most important aspect of the doctrine of total depravity is that it is impossible for any one of us to meet God's standard on our own by living sinlessly like Christ did. The sermon on the mount should be jaw-dropping for anyone that thinks they can. There's more to TD, including the "inability" part, but I want to address the difficult hurdle that many many people express on this issue that you talk about in the second half of your post. It is very hard for many to accept that that there are people completely untouched by the gospel, and that's not bad in the sense that it should be a spur to missions.

The great commission (Matt 28:16-20) makes it clear that Christ followers should spread the gospel to those that haven't heard. By default this means that there are unreached peoples - the ordained engine of the gospel making its way to these unreached people is by disciples going out into the world and spreading the truth.

Romans 10:9 - "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." I will not deny the plausibility of the miraculous means of God intervening in a completely unreached person to save them, but without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation. The fact is that the gospel has not and will not be heard and believed by many people on earth and they will not be saved. It should be deeply saddening, but we should not let this warp our understanding of who God is.

The key is understanding our state and this seems to be where people have trouble. We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator, whether we claim to know it or not (except this is also where your pointing out Paul's statements about everyone having an innate knowledge of God comes into play). We don't set the terms. Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice. There is no injustice or unfairness for those that die without ever hearing the gospel, despite its painful reality. Grace is Christ standing in our place at that judgement and is an unimaginably amazing gift.

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace. But that's not how grace works. It is a gift and always has been since Christ chose his first disciples from among fisherman and tax collectors. You weren't just given "advantages," you were given a blessing that others will never get. That should rightfully be a motivator for us to obey the great commission.




Your post got me to thinking…

Those in the "choice" camp: How is it a choice for those who have not heard the gospel? So, maybe we do choose of our own free will, but that's then only applicable to those which have a choice in the first place. So what then do you make of those who never get that choice? Is that then not God electing them unto eternal punishment?

ETA: this is a question for those who believe the unsaved will be in eternal Hell.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
scripture says they will be judged by what they have done. just like you.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

scripture says they will be judged by what they have done. just like you.
Agree. No one is preordained to hell with no chance. That is not our God.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Howdy, it is me! said:

tk111 said:

The Banned said:

I think most Christians have probably had their thought before. I know I have wrestled with it. What I think this boils down to is the doctrinal difference between total depravity and original sin.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves. We'll sometimes see atheists using similar reasoning on how all charity is actually selfish if you really think about it. We're doing it to feel good about ourselves or for public recognition and not to just do an objective good. A Christian should be able to give an answer for why this is untrue.

Original sin states that we still have the human nature God gave us. We were created in His image and to seek union with Him. The fall did not completely rewire us. We still know He is there in some capacity and our conscience still Exists. Paul says this in Acts and Romans. Aristotle, in complete paganism, recognizes that there must be some kind of "uncaused cause" the everything answers to.

If we can get passed a total depravity doctrine and move towards one that recognizes we can all hear God's call to some degree, then it offers a potential path to heaven through Jesus EVEN IF we have never heard His name. Not because the person is just "better" than the people around him or her, but because that person receives the same grace filled reaching out from God that we all do, and while they couldn't name where it is coming from, they responded.

I think the concerns you bring up like born in a better home, better evangelization, smarter/dumber are all valid to a degree. Why else do we bother teaching our kids anything if what we teach them won't help in their faith journey? But the real question we all have to answer is: is my life mine, or does it belong to a higher power?

That doesn't necessarily require any of what you listed above. Those things help and we should all be preaching His message everywhere and always, but His reality isn't just cut off from or not given to some. Do some of us have advantages? Yes. We thank God for those advantages and ask His mercy for those that don't. But this is very different than God simply leaving them out altogether.
OK Im hopping on this thread super late to get off the one on the politics board so I know I'm gonna end up re-hashing previous discussions...sorry, I'll go back and read more as I have time.

Total depravity says we cannot do anything without thinking about ourselves.

Eh I can get on board with this to some degree, but TD, which can also be described as "wholly defiled" focuses on the our condition as a result of sin. The most important aspect of the doctrine of total depravity is that it is impossible for any one of us to meet God's standard on our own by living sinlessly like Christ did. The sermon on the mount should be jaw-dropping for anyone that thinks they can. There's more to TD, including the "inability" part, but I want to address the difficult hurdle that many many people express on this issue that you talk about in the second half of your post. It is very hard for many to accept that that there are people completely untouched by the gospel, and that's not bad in the sense that it should be a spur to missions.

The great commission (Matt 28:16-20) makes it clear that Christ followers should spread the gospel to those that haven't heard. By default this means that there are unreached peoples - the ordained engine of the gospel making its way to these unreached people is by disciples going out into the world and spreading the truth.

Romans 10:9 - "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." I will not deny the plausibility of the miraculous means of God intervening in a completely unreached person to save them, but without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation. The fact is that the gospel has not and will not be heard and believed by many people on earth and they will not be saved. It should be deeply saddening, but we should not let this warp our understanding of who God is.

The key is understanding our state and this seems to be where people have trouble. We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator, whether we claim to know it or not (except this is also where your pointing out Paul's statements about everyone having an innate knowledge of God comes into play). We don't set the terms. Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice. There is no injustice or unfairness for those that die without ever hearing the gospel, despite its painful reality. Grace is Christ standing in our place at that judgement and is an unimaginably amazing gift.

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace. But that's not how grace works. It is a gift and always has been since Christ chose his first disciples from among fisherman and tax collectors. You weren't just given "advantages," you were given a blessing that others will never get. That should rightfully be a motivator for us to obey the great commission.




Your post got me to thinking…

Those in the "choice" camp: How is it a choice for those who have not heard the gospel? So, maybe we do choose of our own free will, but that's then only applicable to those which have a choice in the first place. So what then do you make of those who never get that choice? Is that then not God electing them unto eternal punishment?

ETA: this is a question for those who believe the unsaved will be in eternal Hell.


We would leave open the possibility that God, in His mercy, has reach out to those in other areas and that some of those may be responding to His call and Jesus' atonement without being able to call it that by name.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If we all deserve hell why does God keep creating people? If He is love and desires all men to be saved, as Scripture clearly states, why create people to suffer eternally? Strange view of a loving Father. Abba

That would be pure evil. And God is not evil.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Zobel said:

Counterpoint: all of the warnings against hell are made to Christians. The NT scriptures are silent about those outside the Church, the people you call "unreached".

Not sure what the implication you're trying to make here is.

Also - while Christ did absolutely provide a means for the forgiveness of sins (plural), the atonement wasn't just about individual wrongdoing, but about the residual taint of Sin (singular) in the world: the corruption that was like a disease. He took away the Sin (singular) of the world. The camp of Israel was a purified place from Sin, maintained by regular blood in the annual atonement, that enabled God to both dwell among the people and be approached by them. The Torah is like a sin-management system.

Largely agree with this.

I think contra the individualistic approach given here, we have to understand the huge undercurrent of people-groups in the NT. The once-for-all atonement purified the world from Sin, which extended that access to God from the Israelites or those who had access to the Temple to all mankind. That's why the great commission doesn't say "teach each person" but "teach all nations".

The great commission says "go therefore and make disciples of all nations...teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." I think you've twisted that a bit to jive with your description of the nature of the veil torn between the temple/Jews and the gentiles. See Rom 10 as well.

This doesn't take away from the aspect of salvation which is individual, or the judgment which is individual, but it does give a parallel current that we must pay attention to -- especially when reading St Paul's works, which focus on this aspect in a unique way.

So when we say - "without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation" - I think we need to be super careful.

Quote:

We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator...Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice.
Eh, that's not what it says though. it says all have sinned, and all died. The wages of sin are death.

Yes - we've all earned those wages but those in Christ have their debt paid.

St Paul - when explicitly talking about both Jews and non-Jews - says "God 'will repay each person according to what they have done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew."

So what is you conclusion from this? You quoted Rom 2 but go on to Rom 3 - "No one is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks after God...and then verses 20-26 especially; "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the the redemption of Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith." He then goes on to explain that Christ's work was done to maintain God's perfect justice, and He "is justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

There's no conflict between the mercy and justice of God. His mercy is perfectly just, and His justice is perfectly merciful.

Completely agree with the first sentence, but His justice is perfectly just and his mercy is perfectly merciful; the two are not in conflict but they are not one in the same thing. Rom 9:13 "...Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses: ' I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."
Quote:

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace.
This is likewise confused. It isn't about our view about opportunity. It is understanding that everyone receives grace, sufficient for their salvation, which is why God is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful.

My sentence is pretty poor there. Those who struggle with the idea that people who die having never heard the gospel will be judged and found guilty usually believe it is unfair that those people were "not given the chance" to believe in something they have never heard that could have saved them.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

Zobel said:

Counterpoint: all of the warnings against hell are made to Christians. The NT scriptures are silent about those outside the Church, the people you call "unreached".

Not sure what the implication you're trying to make here is.

Also - while Christ did absolutely provide a means for the forgiveness of sins (plural), the atonement wasn't just about individual wrongdoing, but about the residual taint of Sin (singular) in the world: the corruption that was like a disease. He took away the Sin (singular) of the world. The camp of Israel was a purified place from Sin, maintained by regular blood in the annual atonement, that enabled God to both dwell among the people and be approached by them. The Torah is like a sin-management system.

Largely agree with this.

I think contra the individualistic approach given here, we have to understand the huge undercurrent of people-groups in the NT. The once-for-all atonement purified the world from Sin, which extended that access to God from the Israelites or those who had access to the Temple to all mankind. That's why the great commission doesn't say "teach each person" but "teach all nations".

The great commission says "go therefore and make disciples of all nations...teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." I think you've twisted that a bit to jive with your description of the nature of the veil torn between the temple/Jews and the gentiles. See Rom 10 as well.

This doesn't take away from the aspect of salvation which is individual, or the judgment which is individual, but it does give a parallel current that we must pay attention to -- especially when reading St Paul's works, which focus on this aspect in a unique way.

So when we say - "without the faith that God took on flesh and lived a perfect sinless life and was sacrificed as the perfect atonement for our transgressions against Him, there is no salvation" - I think we need to be super careful.

Quote:

We deserve hell. Hell is the just punishment for our sins against the perfect holy Creator...Justice is served completely appropriately for every human on earth, and if it were eternal hellfire for every person, there would be no injustice.
Eh, that's not what it says though. it says all have sinned, and all died. The wages of sin are death.

Yes - we've all earned those wages but those in Christ have their debt paid.

St Paul - when explicitly talking about both Jews and non-Jews - says "God 'will repay each person according to what they have done.' To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the non-Jew."

So what is you conclusion from this? You quoted Rom 2 but go on to Rom 3 - "No one is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks after God...and then verses 20-26 especially; "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the the redemption of Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith." He then goes on to explain that Christ's work was done to maintain God's perfect justice, and He "is justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

There's no conflict between the mercy and justice of God. His mercy is perfectly just, and His justice is perfectly merciful.

Completely agree with the first sentence, but His justice is perfectly just and his mercy is perfectly merciful; the two are not in conflict but they are not one in the same thing. Rom 9:13 "...Jacob I loved and Esau I hated. What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses: ' I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy."
Quote:

It is very very hard to come to grips with the fact that many people will receive justice, because in their eyes, they were not afforded the opportunity to receive grace.
This is likewise confused. It isn't about our view about opportunity. It is understanding that everyone receives grace, sufficient for their salvation, which is why God is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful.

My sentence is pretty poor there. Those who struggle with the idea that people who die having never heard the gospel will be judged and found guilty usually believe it is unfair that those people were "not given the chance" to believe in something they have never heard that could have saved them.

But if you are a Calvinist, what difference does it make? They are either elect or damned since the beginning of time, correct?

And Esau ended up being blessed. Not even bringing up that Jacob symbolized Israel and Esau Edom.

Always felt sorry for Esau.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

If we all deserve hell why does God keep creating people? If He is love and desires all men to be saved, as Scripture clearly states, why create people to suffer eternally? Strange view of a loving Father. Abba

That would be pure evil. And God is not evil.
Doc, I've seen other people in the past talk with you on this and provide scriptural support that you do not interact with, but repeatedly respond with your gut feelings. You have a big heart man, and I love that. But I don't think if I get into this you are going to actually read and consider anything I post.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

dermdoc said:

If we all deserve hell why does God keep creating people? If He is love and desires all men to be saved, as Scripture clearly states, why create people to suffer eternally? Strange view of a loving Father. Abba

That would be pure evil. And God is not evil.
Doc, I've seen other people in the past talk with you on this and provide scriptural support that you do not interact with, but repeatedly respond with your gut feelings. You have a big heart man, and I love that. But I don't think if I get into this you are going to actually read and consider anything I post.
I read everything. Hit me. And I have always interacted to my knowledge.

Do you think God loves every person He created?

And if not, why did He create them?

Two simple answers would suffice.

And God has a much bigger heart than me, agree?

Seriously, throw me a Scripture. Happy to respond.

And when you cut it to the quick, the only Scripture that holds is Matthew 25:46.

The key to that is why was kolasis used instead of timoria and what does aionios mean in the original Greek?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:


But if you are a Calvinist, what difference does it make? They are either elect or damned since the beginning of time, correct?

And Esau ended up being blessed. Not even bringing up that Jacob symbolized Israel and Esau Edom.

Always felt sorry for Esau.

This a very common caricature of Calvinism. Consider something for moment: if Calvinists believe what you just stated, why were/are so many well-known devoted missionaries Calvinist? William Carey, John Elliot, David Livingstone, Adoniram Johnson, Henry Martyn, Sam Zwemer, Robert Moffatt...many of them killed attempting to spread the gospel.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

dermdoc said:


But if you are a Calvinist, what difference does it make? They are either elect or damned since the beginning of time, correct?

And Esau ended up being blessed. Not even bringing up that Jacob symbolized Israel and Esau Edom.

Always felt sorry for Esau.

This a very common caricature of Calvinism. Consider something for moment: if Calvinists believe what you just stated, why were/are so many well-known devoted missionaries Calvinist? William Carey, John Elliot, David Livingstone, Adoniram Johnson, Henry Martyn, Sam Zwemer, Robert Moffatt...many of them killed attempting to spread the gospel.
I love all of them. I disagree with the theology of double predestination. Love Spurgeon. But if there is TULIP, what difference does it make?

And may I ask how it is a caricature? Do you believe in TULIP?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

dermdoc said:


But if you are a Calvinist, what difference does it make? They are either elect or damned since the beginning of time, correct?

And Esau ended up being blessed. Not even bringing up that Jacob symbolized Israel and Esau Edom.

Always felt sorry for Esau.

This a very common caricature of Calvinism. Consider something for moment: if Calvinists believe what you just stated, why were/are so many well-known devoted missionaries Calvinist? William Carey, John Elliot, David Livingstone, Adoniram Johnson, Henry Martyn, Sam Zwemer, Robert Moffatt...many of them killed attempting to spread the gospel.
Does God love every human He created?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

tk111 said:

dermdoc said:

If we all deserve hell why does God keep creating people? If He is love and desires all men to be saved, as Scripture clearly states, why create people to suffer eternally? Strange view of a loving Father. Abba

That would be pure evil. And God is not evil.
Doc, I've seen other people in the past talk with you on this and provide scriptural support that you do not interact with, but repeatedly respond with your gut feelings. You have a big heart man, and I love that. But I don't think if I get into this you are going to actually read and consider anything I post.
I read everything. Hit me. And I have always interacted to my knowledge.

Do you think God loves every person He created?

And if not, why did He create them?

Two simple answers would suffice.

And God has a much bigger heart than me, agree?

Seriously, throw me a Scripture. Happy to respond.

And when you cut it to the quick, the only Scripture that holds is Matthew 25:46.

The key to that is why was kolasis used instead of timoria and what does aionios mean in the original Greek?

aionios means eternity. In every greek manuscript we have, it is used in a context of time without ending when in reference to the future. When in reference to the past, it could potentially mean a realllly long time ago (like perhaps Rom 16:25).

kolasis means transcendent retribution and punishment. Its inflicted pain for the purpose of chastisement. Timoria is synonymous. If you're planning to make a stretch out of the supposed added connotation of timoria, you should be aware that there aren't really any greek scholars out there that believe there is a legit difference to be had here. Its akin to when people make much ado about nothing when it comes to the use of agapao and phileo in Jn 21.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
tk111 said:

dermdoc said:

tk111 said:

dermdoc said:

If we all deserve hell why does God keep creating people? If He is love and desires all men to be saved, as Scripture clearly states, why create people to suffer eternally? Strange view of a loving Father. Abba

That would be pure evil. And God is not evil.
Doc, I've seen other people in the past talk with you on this and provide scriptural support that you do not interact with, but repeatedly respond with your gut feelings. You have a big heart man, and I love that. But I don't think if I get into this you are going to actually read and consider anything I post.
I read everything. Hit me. And I have always interacted to my knowledge.

Do you think God loves every person He created?

And if not, why did He create them?

Two simple answers would suffice.

And God has a much bigger heart than me, agree?

Seriously, throw me a Scripture. Happy to respond.

And when you cut it to the quick, the only Scripture that holds is Matthew 25:46.

The key to that is why was kolasis used instead of timoria and what does aionios mean in the original Greek?

aionios means eternity. In every greek manuscript we have, it is used in a context of time without ending when in reference to the future. When in reference to the past, it could potentially mean a realllly long time ago (like perhaps Rom 16:25).

kolasis means transcendent retribution and punishment. Its inflicted pain for the purpose of chastisement. Timoria is synonymous. If you're planning to make a stretch out of the supposed added connotation of timoria, you should be aware that there aren't really any greek scholars out there that believe there is a legit difference to be had here. Its akin to when people make much ado about nothing when it comes to the use of agapao and phileo in Jn 21.
Depends on who you read my friend. And I have never heard timoria and kolasis are synonymous. Does William Barclay count as a scholar?

There are whole books written by distinguished scholars discussing what aionios mean. Why are you so sure of that? Honest question.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4514
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And if you really want to look at what aioniosis means I recommend this.

https://www.amazon.com/Terms-Eternity-Ai%C3%B4nios-Classical-Christian/dp/1611439701
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
tk111
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
dermdoc said:

tk111 said:

dermdoc said:


But if you are a Calvinist, what difference does it make? They are either elect or damned since the beginning of time, correct?

And Esau ended up being blessed. Not even bringing up that Jacob symbolized Israel and Esau Edom.

Always felt sorry for Esau.

This a very common caricature of Calvinism. Consider something for moment: if Calvinists believe what you just stated, why were/are so many well-known devoted missionaries Calvinist? William Carey, John Elliot, David Livingstone, Adoniram Johnson, Henry Martyn, Sam Zwemer, Robert Moffatt...many of them killed attempting to spread the gospel.
Does God love every human He created?
Do you believe unsaved people go to hell? If so, what difference does it make in the context of "God's love for them" what you or I believe are the ultimate means of them getting there? Is he not capable of just saving everyone? Why doesn't He? If your answer is that he doesn't save them because they don't believe of their volition, I assume you mean it is because ultimately God is preserving their libertarian free will in their choice to believe, because if he didn't do that, everyone would just be robots at the will of a totalitarian dictator? You're going to post all of that regardless of any passages I provide right? It always ends with "I just can't believe in a God that would...."

You picked some pieces out of 1 Tim 2 earlier. You said you love Spurgeon, a Calvinist, and he has a sermon on 1 Tim 2:4. I have listened in person to world-renowned greek scholars explain how the all of that passage is not in reference to every person on earth, yet I agree with Spurgeon's take on it. Perhaps his way of approaching it might give you some insight? Its long, but its a great sermon.

https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/spe/2-timothy-4.html
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.