View Full Version : Do you Believe that God is "PERFECTLY LOVING?
crakjak
02-12-2007, 10:53 PM
You may say God is "just" and the He is "holy", but neither characteristic requires that God be LOVE? God could be just and holy, yet not be perfectly loving!
You may say God is "just" and the He is "holy", but neither characteristic requires that God be LOVE? God could be just and holy, yet not be perfectly loving!
God is absolutely perfect in ALL of His attributes. To say otherwise is blasphemy!
crakjak
02-13-2007, 09:43 PM
God is absolutely perfect in ALL of His attributes. To say otherwise is blasphemy!
I agree that God is perfect in ALL His attributes. I raise the discussion because the traditions of men attribute characteristics to God that do not reflect perfect love, therefore the question.
For example, how is it possible for a perfectly loving God to create for, or to allow humans to be born for eternal damnation (endless tortment)? Absolutely no presentation of endless tortment can be defined as perfectly loving.
Of course I do not agree with the "eternal tortment" assertion. God is perfectly loving therefore this tradition of man is patently false.
I agree that God is perfect in ALL His attributes. I raise the discussion because the traditions of men attribute characteristics to God that do not reflect perfect love, therefore the question.
For example, how is it possible for a perfectly loving God to create for, or to allow humans to be born for eternal damnation (endless tortment)? Absolutely no presentation of endless tortment can be defined as perfectly loving.
Of course I do not agree with the "eternal tortment" assertion. God is perfectly loving therefore this tradition of man is patently false.I think that this notion that a God of "perfect love" would not punish someone for all of eternity is a false argument and denies God's being perfectly holy and just. It is out of perfect love that God sent His only begotten Son to die on the cross for His elect but it is out of perfect justice that God will eternally punish the wicked. "And these shall go away into everlasting fire..." Also, keep in mind the scripture "Jacob I loved but Esau I hated."
You may say God is "just" and the He is "holy", but neither characteristic requires that God be LOVE? God could be just and holy, yet not be perfectly loving!
"God is Love", and he commands us too love.
His Love may not always he attributed to what man views as holy, merciful or just.
But understand one thing, God Loves the righteous man.
As for the sinner God is the judge.
"God is Love", and he commands us too love.
His Love may not always he attributed to what man views as holy, merciful or just.
But understand one thing, God Loves the righteous man.
As for the sinner God is the judge.
That's the problem: so often people try to make it seem that God's love precludes Him from acting out of His perfect justice and holiness.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 12:08 AM
I think that this notion that a God of "perfect love" would not punish someone for all of eternity is a false argument and denies God's being perfectly holy and just. It is out of perfect love that God sent His only begotten Son to die on the cross for His elect but it is out of perfect justice that God will eternally punish the wicked. "And these shall go away into everlasting fire..." Also, keep in mind the scripture "Jacob I loved but Esau I hated."
How about (Amos 6.8), "The Lord God has sworn by Himself...'I abhor the pride of Jacob, and hate his strongholds; and I will deliver up the city and all that is in it'" Seems Jacob's lot has turned for the worse.
(Genesis 33.10) Jacob speaks of Esau after their reconcilation, "...for truly to see your face is like seeing the face of God--since you have received me with such favor." Seems Esau's lot had improved.
These words of love and hate speak of earthly positions and not of eternal destinations.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 12:15 AM
"God is Love", and he commands us too love.
His Love may not always he attributed to what man views as holy, merciful or just.
But understand one thing, God Loves the righteous man.
As for the sinner God is the judge.
I would not disagree with any of your statements, as stated. However, we cannot rightly attribute to God acts that defies love, and just say man can't understand.
Endless torture for any human is not holy, merciful, just or loving, therefore it cannot be true of God.
How about (Amos 6.8), "The Lord God has sworn by Himself...'I abhor the pride of Jacob, and hate his strongholds; and I will deliver up the city and all that is in it'" Seems Jacob's lot has turned for the worse.There's a BIG difference between God saying He hates Jacob's (actually, the nation of Israel) pride and the nation's strongholds and God saying He hates Jacob himself.
(Genesis 33.10) Jacob speaks of Esau after their reconcilation, "...for truly to see your face is like seeing the face of God--since you have received me with such favor." Seems Esau's lot had improved.Not in the eyes of God.
These words of love and hate speak of earthly positions and not of eternal destinations.But the passage Paul quoted in Romans is about eternal election.
I would not disagree with any of your statements, as stated. However, we cannot rightly attribute to God acts that defies love, and just say man can't understand.Defy love according to whom? According to you? Consider Romans 9:9-24...
"For this is what the promise said: 'About this time next year I will return and Sarah shall have a son.' And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call - she was told, 'The older will serve the younger.' As it is written, 'Jacob I loved, but 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 have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.' So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, 'Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?' But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me like this?' Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory - even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
Endless torture for any human is not holy, merciful, just or loving, therefore it cannot be true of God.According to whom? According to you? Where does the BIBLE say that endless punishment is not holy, merciful, just, or loving?
Felicity
02-15-2007, 09:40 AM
Chan............
Are you and Chancellor one and the same?
Chan............
Are you and Chancellor one and the same?I am not registered here under two different screen names.
Felicity
02-15-2007, 09:51 AM
I am not registered here under two different screen names.Okay then so you're not?
Because Chan registered a few days before Chancellor did and I've never known Chancellor to post as two separate people before on the other forums he's been part of.
So you are not him and he is not you! Thought so.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 08:09 PM
Defy love according to whom? According to you? Consider Romans 9:9-24...
"For this is what the promise said: 'About this time next year I will return and Sarah shall have a son.' And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call - she was told, 'The older will serve the younger.' As it is written, 'Jacob I loved, but 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 have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.' So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.' So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, 'Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?' But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why have you made me like this?' Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory - even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
According to whom? According to you? Where does the BIBLE say that endless punishment is not holy, merciful, just, or loving?
Again, Chan you are attributing these statements to eternity, when in fact they are speaking of earthly purposes. Speaking of Esau and Jacob, the love and hate is defined by their earthly positioning; "the older will serve the younger", not one saved and the other lost.
When God thinks of the election of Jacob, He clearly has in mind the struggle between Jacob and Esau for the birthright and for their father's blessing. This in no way is defining their future end.
The question directed to God, 'why have you made me like this?' is speaking again of earthly purpose, not eternal destination. It is error to so define the character of God. How can you possibly attribute to a perfectly loving God the idea of committing any human to "endless torture"? It is simply erroneous human reasoning.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 08:30 PM
According to whom? According to you? Where does the BIBLE say that endless punishment is not holy, merciful, just, or loving?
Do we really have to have chapter and verse to understand that endless punishment in NOT holy, merciful, just or loving?
JN Anderson
02-15-2007, 08:44 PM
Yes. God is perfectly loving. However, some mistakenly think that love will always be longsuffering and never shift to chastisement or correction. This is totally false. The latter attributes are perfect examples of divine and paternal love--the balance of love and discipline. Also, the scriptures tell us that "perfect love" casts out all fear; this is something humans can do. Therefore, if it is possible for humans to have a mature love then it is certainly within the realm of an omnipotent God to do so as well.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 08:53 PM
Chan,
Romans the eleventh chapter is very instructive; it is there that Paul explicitly states God's severity toward the disobedient, His judgment of sin, even His willingness to blind the eyes and to harden the hearts of the disobedient, are expressions of a more fundamental quality, that of mercy, which is itself an expression of His purifying love.
In chapter eleven verse seven, he writes: "What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened" He then asks, "have they [the non elect] stumbled so as to fall?" and his answer is emphatic: "By no means!"(11.11)
By the end of the following verse, he is already speaking of their full inclusion: "Now if their stumbling means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!"
Three verses later he is speaking of their acceptance meaning, "life from the dead" that "all Israel will be saved" including the blinded and the hardened.
These verses clearly show how God makes some for honor (in this world) and some for dishonor (in this life) all for His divine purpose.
crakjak
02-15-2007, 09:07 PM
Yes. God is perfectly loving. However, some mistakenly think that love will always be longsuffering and never shift to chastisement or correction. This is totally false. The latter attributes are perfect examples of divine and paternal love--the balance of love and discipline. Also, the scriptures tell us that "perfect love" casts out all fear; this is something humans can do. Therefore, if it is possible for humans to have a mature love then it is certainly within the realm of an omnipotent God to do so as well.
Hello Sab,
Your human example is a good one, and can be instructive since we are created in the image of God and certainly should reflect at least some residual of His perspective.
My question would be, what is the purpose of the paternal balance of love and discipline? Is it not corrective, curative and to bring about a positive result in our children.
I used to tell my three sons and daughter is was to make them into "right, upstanding citizens". Chastisement and correction was used in the process.:sad
Likewise, I believe God's purpose is to bring about a positive result (not endless torture) in His children. "His arm is not short" nor is He slack in his ability to accomplish His purpose.:highfive
Do we really have to have chapter and verse to understand that endless punishment in NOT holy, merciful, just or loving?Yes. Otherwise, it is nothing more than your own opinion.
Chan,
Romans the eleventh chapter is very instructive; it is there that Paul explicitly states God's severity toward the disobedient, His judgment of sin, even His willingness to blind the eyes and to harden the hearts of the disobedient, are expressions of a more fundamental quality, that of mercy, which is itself an expression of His purifying love.But that mercy is toward His ELECT, not toward those who are not elect.
In chapter eleven verse seven, he writes: "What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened" He then asks, "have they [the non elect] stumbled so as to fall?" and his answer is emphatic: "By no means!"(11.11)How could they have fallen from what they never had in the first place?
By the end of the following verse, he is already speaking of their full inclusion: "Now if their stumbling means riches for the world, and if their defeat means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!" The full inclusion of Israel as a nation does not mean the full inclusion of every person in Israel.
Three verses later he is speaking of their acceptance meaning, "life from the dead" that "all Israel will be saved" including the blinded and the hardened.See above. All of the elect of Israel will be saved.
These verses clearly show how God makes some for honor (in this world) and some for dishonor (in this life) all for His divine purpose.Yes, He does in the sense of His eternal purpose - which precludes universal salvation.
Again, Chan you are attributing these statements to eternity, when in fact they are speaking of earthly purposes. Speaking of Esau and Jacob, the love and hate is defined by their earthly positioning; "the older will serve the younger", not one saved and the other lost.No, I'm simply asserting that God is absolutely sovereign and gets to do whatever He pleases.
When God thinks of the election of Jacob, He clearly has in mind the struggle between Jacob and Esau for the birthright and for their father's blessing. This in no way is defining their future end.The struggle was merely how God's plan was carried out.
The question directed to God, 'why have you made me like this?' is speaking again of earthly purpose, not eternal destination. It is error to so define the character of God. How can you possibly attribute to a perfectly loving God the idea of committing any human to "endless torture"? It is simply erroneous human reasoning.No, the passage has to do with the created being not having the right to protest God's purposes. God WILL have mercy on whomever He chooses and He will withhold mercy from whomever He chooses.
crakjak
02-16-2007, 04:59 PM
No, I'm simply asserting that God is absolutely sovereign and gets to do whatever He pleases.
The struggle was merely how God's plan was carried out.
No, the passage has to do with the created being not having the right to protest God's purposes. God WILL have mercy on whomever He chooses and He will withhold mercy from whomever He chooses.
Okay, I don't see in the your responses any disagreement.
In obedience we experience God's mercy as kindness; when in disobedience we experience God's mercy as severity (purifying love).
Though the unbelieving Jews were "enemies of God" (Romans 11.28), they nonetheless became "disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy" (11.31-NIV).
JN Anderson
02-16-2007, 05:08 PM
Hello Sab,
Your human example is a good one, and can be instructive since we are created in the image of God and certainly should reflect at least some residual of His perspective.
My question would be, what is the purpose of the paternal balance of love and discipline? Is it not corrective, curative and to bring about a positive result in our children.
I used to tell my three sons and daughter is was to make them into "right, upstanding citizens". Chastisement and correction was used in the process.:sad
Likewise, I believe God's purpose is to bring about a positive result (not endless torture) in His children. "His arm is not short" nor is He slack in his ability to accomplish His purpose.:highfive
Well, your post assumes annihilation. It also assumes that annihilation is not part of God's "endtime" purpose and just something exclusive to our lives while on earth. That does not necessarily follow. Also, it is clear that God, Himself, foreknew the "falling away" of some while still on the journey to glorification (c.f. Rev. 3:5, 2 Peter 3:17, 1 Tim. 1:20, 2 Tim. 2:17, 2 Tim. 4:10, Heb. 6:6, Luke 8:13).
RevDWW
02-16-2007, 06:04 PM
Hello Sab,
Your human example is a good one, and can be instructive since we are created in the image of God and certainly should reflect at least some residual of His perspective.
My question would be, what is the purpose of the paternal balance of love and discipline? Is it not corrective, curative and to bring about a positive result in our children.
I used to tell my three sons and daughter is was to make them into "right, upstanding citizens". Chastisement and correction was used in the process.:sad
Likewise, I believe God's purpose is to bring about a positive result (not endless torture) in His children. "His arm is not short" nor is He slack in his ability to accomplish His purpose.:highfive
What would you call it when a person has a limb removed because it cancerous and would destroy the rest of the body?
crakjak
02-16-2007, 06:26 PM
What would you call it when a person has a limb removed because it cancerous and would destroy the rest of the body?
I would call it a parable that Jesus used to describe the coming holocaust of Jerusalem and Judea in 70 AD. It was better for the believing Jews to enter into life of the New Covenant than to be cut off with the unbelievers and the Old Covenant.
Mark 9.49 "For everyone will be seasoned with fire..."
crakjak
02-16-2007, 10:42 PM
Well, your post assumes annihilation. It also assumes that annihilation is not part of God's "endtime" purpose and just something exclusive to our lives while on earth. That does not necessarily follow. Also, it is clear that God, Himself, foreknew the "falling away" of some while still on the journey to glorification (c.f. Rev. 3:5, 2 Peter 3:17, 1 Tim. 1:20, 2 Tim. 2:17, 2 Tim. 4:10, Heb. 6:6, Luke 8:13).
What is the meaning of "falling away"? There are many references as you have noted of folks "falling away". Also, why would an apostle turn someone over to satan for instruction? There is at least two such references in the epistles. I believe these are references of folks being chastised for correction.
JN Anderson
02-18-2007, 07:31 PM
1. What is the meaning of "falling away"? There are many references as you have noted of folks "falling away".
2. Also, why would an apostle turn someone over to satan for instruction? There is at least two such references in the epistles. I believe these are references of folks being chastised for correction.
1. In the Heb. 6:6 passage the "fall away" there is parapipto which quite literally refers ones abandoning "a former relationship or association, or to dissociate" with. (1)
2. I believe, especially in the instance of 1 Tim. 1:20, that the turning over to satan was a disciplinary action in hopes of restoration and/or realization. This, however, does not suppose that all will heed or understand the discipline and return. Some will not because they left the Lord, their first love. Peter even speaks of those who arrogantly fell from their own "steadfastness", not realizing their ability to still sin and fall away from God.
Notes:
1. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament : Based on Semantic Domains, electronic ed. of the 2nd edition. (New York: United Bible societies, 1996, c1989). 1:448.
JN Anderson
02-18-2007, 07:38 PM
Crakjak:
Passages such as Luke 3:6 (see below) do not affirm Universalism. In this passage, in particular, Luke is emphasizing the universal availability of the gospel--not the universal acceptance or impartation of such.
"And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
I would not disagree with any of your statements, as stated. However, we cannot rightly attribute to God acts that defies love, and just say man can't understand.
Endless torture for any human is not holy, merciful, just or loving, therefore it cannot be true of God.
In faith we truly have to say without human intervention, God judges the sinner and God alone.
crakjak
02-18-2007, 11:29 PM
1. In the Heb. 6:6 passage the "fall away" there is parapipto which quite literally refers ones abandoning "a former relationship or association, or to dissociate" with.
Of course, this meaning does not preclude a restoration.
2. I believe, especially in the instance of 1 Tim. 1:20, that the turning over to satan was a disciplinary action in hopes of restoration and/or realization. This, however, does not suppose that all will heed or understand the discipline and return. Some will not because they left the Lord, their first love. Peter even speaks of those who arrogantly fell from their own "steadfastness", not realizing their ability to still sin and fall away from God.
The "turning one over to satan" gives us an idea of the extent to which God will go to bring those justified by his blood (all men) into right relationship. We all at one time or another "fall" from perfect relationship with our heavenly Father.
crakjak
02-19-2007, 12:09 AM
Crakjak:
Passages such as Luke 3:6 (see below) do not affirm Universalism. In this passage, in particular, Luke is emphasizing the universal availability of the gospel--not the universal acceptance or impartation of such.
"And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
The fifth chapter of Romans read with the proper focus clearly declares the universal reconciliation of sinners to God at the time of Jesus death and thru His blood. (verse 10 "...when we were enemies we were reconciled to God...")
Most folks in the earth do not know they have been reconciled therefore continue in their sins, perishing and walking in destruction.
Jesus stated on the cross, "It is finished" and the reconciliation of all men WAS finished. Verse 10, tells us those who were reconciled WILL be saved by His life.
Verse 15 calls it a "free gift", verse 17 tells us that Jesus death had more far reaching impact on man than the sin of Adam. Adam's sin we all boldly proclaim immediately effected (condemned) all men. The effect of Jesus shed blood was the immediate reconciliation of all men.
We should be now proclaiming the message of reconciliation (verse 11).
JN Anderson
02-19-2007, 12:04 PM
Of course, this meaning does not preclude a restoration.
The "turning one over to satan" gives us an idea of the extent to which God will go to bring those justified by his blood (all men) into right relationship. We all at one time or another "fall" from perfect relationship with our heavenly Father.
I'm sure your first sentence was TIC because it is actual nonsense. I don't think the historical or biblical data show whether or not anytime this word was used that absolute restoration was accomplished or no. I do believe that restoration as well as further distance from God is possible because of this falling away. God's love is infinite so He will always be reaching and available for the prodigals to return; however, the return is the prodigal's job.
I agree with your last paragraph. However, you take an extra leap that I do not feel is warranted by scripture and by the strict nature of God concerning sin. We will all fall at some time and fail God. Some will get up and continue. Sadly, some will not.
JN Anderson
02-19-2007, 12:05 PM
The fifth chapter of Romans read with the proper focus clearly declares the universal reconciliation of sinners to God at the time of Jesus death and thru His blood. (verse 10 "...when we were enemies we were reconciled to God...")
Most folks in the earth do not know they have been reconciled therefore continue in their sins, perishing and walking in destruction.
Jesus stated on the cross, "It is finished" and the reconciliation of all men WAS finished. Verse 10, tells us those who were reconciled WILL be saved by His life.
Verse 15 calls it a "free gift", verse 17 tells us that Jesus death had more far reaching impact on man than the sin of Adam. Adam's sin we all boldly proclaim immediately effected (condemned) all men. The effect of Jesus shed blood was the immediate reconciliation of all men.
We should be now proclaiming the message of reconciliation (verse 11).
Hmmm...mind reconciling the actual passage under discussion (e.g. Luke 3:6)?
Felicity
02-19-2007, 01:35 PM
God is perfect in all His attributes!
crakjak
02-19-2007, 05:05 PM
Crakjak:
"And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
It is quite amazing that the the traditional view chooses to diminish scripture that declares the greater hope and magnify scripture concerning destruction. I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation. God will not fail as the Savior of all men, and the redeemer of His creation.
If the vast majority of mankind are cast into "endless" torment or are annihilated, as tradition teaches then we must admit that God fails. Jesus came to seek and to save that which is lost, if He in fact does not find and save then the "project man" is a failure. Of course it is a vain thought because God cannot fail!
2 Cor. 5.19 "...that God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD to Himself, NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES TO THEM and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.":bliss :bliss :bliss
crakjak
02-19-2007, 05:06 PM
God is perfect in all His attributes!
Yes, Felicity He most assuredly is perfect in all His attributes!
JN Anderson
02-20-2007, 10:44 AM
It is quite amazing that the the traditional view chooses to diminish scripture that declares the greater hope and magnify scripture concerning destruction. I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation. God will not fail as the Savior of all men, and the redeemer of His creation.
If the vast majority of mankind are cast into "endless" torment or are annihilated, as tradition teaches then we must admit that God fails. Jesus came to seek and to save that which is lost, if He in fact does not find and save then the "project man" is a failure. Of course it is a vain thought because God cannot fail!
2 Cor. 5.19 "...that God was in Christ reconciling THE WORLD to Himself, NOT IMPUTING THEIR TRESPASSES TO THEM and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.":bliss :bliss :bliss
Crakjak:
You have just committed a logical fallacy. You said, "I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation."
Luke says, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
I'll take the words of Luke. If you'll reread your self you will notice that your arguments are emotive.
Crakjak:
You have just committed a logical fallacy. You said, "I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation."
Luke says, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
I'll take the words of Luke. If you'll reread your self you will notice that your arguments are emotive.Just because all flesh shall see the salvation of God doesn't mean that all flesh will be beneficiaries of that salvation.
JN Anderson
02-20-2007, 11:39 AM
Just because all flesh shall see the salvation of God doesn't mean that all flesh will be beneficiaries of that salvation.
Yeah, that was my point.
Yeah, that was my point.I figured as much. I just don't think crakjak is going to get it.
crakjak
02-20-2007, 07:05 PM
Crakjak:
You have just committed a logical fallacy. You said, "I believe exactly what this verse says. All God's creation will eventually "see" and experience His salvation."
Luke says, "And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)
I'll take the words of Luke. If you'll reread your self you will notice that your arguments are emotive.
I don't think Dr. Luke is making the point the that ALL MEN will just "see" God's salvation. As if God will just tease all men with sometime they will never have. No man will "see" the salvation of God and reject His love, and eventually all will see. I'll add Romans 5.18 to support Bro. Luke:
"Therefore JUST as one man's (ADAM) trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's (JESUS') act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".
This is one of the scriptures that you can see the greater hope, that is if you can let go of the traditional view of a vengeful god.
What is a just "recompense of reward" for someone "born and shapen in iniquity" with an adversary working to deceive that misses the "narrow gate" in his physical life? Some say a endless torment in fire? How about a purifying fire that destroys forever the old man, to save his soul "although by fire".
BTW: I didn't know Pentecostals had a problem with emotion?:sad :bliss:sad :bliss :sad :bliss
crakjak
02-20-2007, 07:22 PM
Just because all flesh shall see the salvation of God doesn't mean that all flesh will be beneficiaries of that salvation.
Chan and Sab, you have to explain away allot of scripture to reach the point you posted above. I may post some of it in future post, but for now I want to introduce a quote by Thomas Talbott.
"The universalist perspective rests upon two theological assumptions for which we can find ample support in the NT: first, that God, being perfectly loving, wills or sincerely desires the redemption of all sinners, and second, that God, being almighty, has the power to achieve this end. If you accept both of these assumptions, then universalism follows as a deductive consequence. So if you reject universalism, then you must also reject at least one of these assumptions; that is you must either deny that God wills (or sincerely desires) the redemption of all sinners or deny that He has the power to achieve it. The Augustinians (Calvinists) deny the first assumption, and the Arminians deny the second. But St. Paul, I have argued, endores both assumptions; and in some of his most systematic theological discourses, such as Romans 5 and 11 and I Corinthians 15, he explicitly endorses the idea of universal reconciliation as well." Quoted from, "The Inescapable Love of God" by Thomas Talbott.
JN Anderson
02-22-2007, 03:55 PM
I don't think Dr. Luke is making the point the that ALL MEN will just "see" God's salvation. As if God will just tease all men with sometime they will never have. No man will "see" the salvation of God and reject His love, and eventually all will see. I'll add Romans 5.18 to support Bro. Luke:
CJ:
You are adding to scripture. Luke said "see" not experience. Plain and simple. The Greek word for "see" literally means to "look at" or "behold." The experience is provided by those who express faith in Christ and partake of the Gospel.
"Therefore JUST as one man's (ADAM) trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's (JESUS') act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".
What translation are you using? The NKJV says, "Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)
This is a LOT different than what you posted. Is adding to scripture becoming something of a habit for you or what?
BTW: I didn't know Pentecostals had a problem with emotion?:sad :bliss:sad :bliss :sad :bliss
An emotive argument is one that usually relies upon the emotions to create and sustain certain postulations. It seems your is replete with this. It has nothing to do with one's religious acquaintance particularly.
crakjak
02-22-2007, 09:45 PM
"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)
"Therefore JUST as one man's trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".(Romans 5.18 NRSV)
Sabellius,
Both of these renderings tells that the very same group of folks that were condemned by Adam's sin, is the very same group that are justified by Jesus' blood. I believe you would agree that ALL were condemned, why is it so hard to believe that all WERE justified?
You can skirt around the point by accusing me of adding to scripture, but it is you that has not explained away the clear teaching of this scripture. This is only one of several scriptures that Paul clearly says this same thing.
BTW: Romans 5.18 supports my view of Luke 3.6!
JN Anderson
02-24-2007, 11:44 AM
"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (Romans 5:18 NKJV)
"Therefore JUST as one man's trespass led to condemnation [or doom] for ALL, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and LIFE FOR ALL".(Romans 5.18 NRSV)
Sabellius,
Both of these renderings tells that the very same group of folks that were condemned by Adam's sin, is the very same group that are justified by Jesus' blood. I believe you would agree that ALL were condemned, why is it so hard to believe that all WERE justified?
You can skirt around the point by accusing me of adding to scripture, but it is you that has not explained away the clear teaching of this scripture. This is only one of several scriptures that Paul clearly says this same thing.
BTW: Romans 5.18 supports my view of Luke 3.6!
You have no biblical support for Universalism. If heretical doctrine of universalism were being taught here, Paul would he contradicting himself, for he has already pictured men as perishing because of sin (2:12; cf. 1Cor 1:18).
Further, his entire presentation of salvation has emphasized the fact that justification is granted only on the basis of faith. Logically then we conclude that only as "the many" are found in Christ can they qualify as belonging to the righteous.
JN Anderson
02-24-2007, 11:46 AM
Chan and Sab, you have to explain away allot of scripture to reach the point you posted above. I may post some of it in future post, but for now I want to introduce a quote by Thomas Talbott.
"The universalist perspective rests upon two theological assumptions for which we can find ample support in the NT: first, that God, being perfectly loving, wills or sincerely desires the redemption of all sinners, and second, that God, being almighty, has the power to achieve this end. If you accept both of these assumptions, then universalism follows as a deductive consequence. So if you reject universalism, then you must also reject at least one of these assumptions; that is you must either deny that God wills (or sincerely desires) the redemption of all sinners or deny that He has the power to achieve it. The Augustinians (Calvinists) deny the first assumption, and the Arminians deny the second. But St. Paul, I have argued, endores both assumptions; and in some of his most systematic theological discourses, such as Romans 5 and 11 and I Corinthians 15, he explicitly endorses the idea of universal reconciliation as well." Quoted from, "The Inescapable Love of God" by Thomas Talbott.
Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.
crakjak
02-24-2007, 04:56 PM
You have no biblical support for Universalism. If heretical doctrine of universalism were being taught here, Paul would he contradicting himself, for he has already pictured men as perishing because of sin (2:12; cf. 1Cor 1:18).
Further, his entire presentation of salvation has emphasized the fact that justification is granted only on the basis of faith. Logically then we conclude that only as "the many" are found in Christ can they qualify as belonging to the righteous.
The support for Universalism is pervasive, however it is in the background due to the traditional view that God is the creator and maintainer of a "hellhole" of endless torture. This view took hold during the dark ages as a means for Rome to manipulate and control the masses. Paul no where describes a place of endless punishment, don't you think that is strange since He was the apostle to the Gentiles?
crakjak
02-24-2007, 04:57 PM
Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.
I have expressed my view of freewill on Chan's thread, you can review it there if you are interested.
crakjak
02-25-2007, 11:54 AM
Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.
Neither do I, scripture tells us that nobody can come to God unless the Spirit draws (literally means "drag") one to Him. The natural man will in no way seek God, when someone comes to God, God has orchestrated the circumstance. We have free will ONLY with the perimeters of the path that has been set before us. Had you be born Hitler would you have handled your circumstances better than he?? Given the same circumstances you and I are potentially the "worse of sinners."
The Spirit calls or draws folks to enter into what Jesus has ALREADY completed, "while we were YET sinners Christ died for us."
God forces no one, except thru orchestrated circumstances that will eventually cause ALL to willfully enter in. Jesus came to seek and to save, so the worst of sinners is in a good position to enter in. All sin will be dealt with, no sin will enter heaven, all works will be tried by fire, and everything that is not pure will be removed.
Talbott does not consider that God has given man free will to choose His salvation. Instead, he imagines a God that forces His acts and decisions, unilaterally, upon man. False. Again.Are you sure it's FREE will? Is it the RIGHT to choose? If it's the RIGHT to choose then God has no right to punish anyone for exercising a right He gave them.
JN Anderson
02-27-2007, 01:03 AM
The support for Universalism is pervasive, however it is in the background due to the traditional view that God is the creator and maintainer of a "hellhole" of endless torture. This view took hold during the dark ages as a means for Rome to manipulate and control the masses. Paul no where describes a place of endless punishment, don't you think that is strange since He was the apostle to the Gentiles?
Dodging. Red Herring. Please reply to my post.
JN Anderson
02-27-2007, 01:14 AM
Neither do I, scripture tells us that nobody can come to God unless the Spirit draws (literally means "drag") one to Him. The natural man will in no way seek God, when someone comes to God, God has orchestrated the circumstance. We have free will ONLY with the perimeters of the path that has been set before us. Had you be born Hitler would you have handled your circumstances better than he?? Given the same circumstances you and I are potentially the "worse of sinners."
Surely you jest. Do you honestly believe that the person Adolph Hitler was the only person, in time, who has endured the same circumstances that he did?
"Helkúō is used by Jesus of the drawing of souls unto Him (Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32, to draw or induce to come). It is the drawing to a certain point as in Joh_21:6, Joh_21:11 indicating the drawing of the net while súrō (Joh_21:8) is merely dragging. To draw a sword (Joh_18:10). See Sept.: 2Sa_22:17; Psa_10:9; Jer_38:13." (1)
The Spirit calls or draws folks to enter into what Jesus has ALREADY completed, "while we were YET sinners Christ died for us."
At what point then would recommend God "complete" the plan of Redemption then? After the whole world has conceded to sin? Hello??
NOTES:
1. The Complete Word Study Dictionary © 1992 By AMG International, Inc. Chattanooga, TN 37422, U.S.A. Revised edition, 1993
crakjak
02-28-2007, 09:49 AM
Surely you jest. Do you honestly believe that the person Adolph Hitler was the only person, in time, who has endured the same circumstances that he did?
"Helkúō is used by Jesus of the drawing of souls unto Him (Joh_6:44; Joh_12:32, to draw or induce to come). It is the drawing to a certain point as in Joh_21:6, Joh_21:11 indicating the drawing of the net while súrō (Joh_21:8) is merely dragging. To draw a sword (Joh_18:10). See Sept.: 2Sa_22:17; Psa_10:9; Jer_38:13." (1)
At what point then would recommend God "complete" the plan of Redemption then? After the whole world has conceded to sin? Hello??
NOTES:
1. The Complete Word Study Dictionary © 1992 By AMG International, Inc. Chattanooga, TN 37422, U.S.A. Revised edition, 1993
Hitler is simply the example for this discussion, of course he was not the only person to endure such circumstances. He may have been the only person to endure such and to also have the power to inflict the misery that he wrought.
If God "induces" someone to come who or what will hinder their coming. You may invoke "freewill", my point is, due to individual circumstances true freewill is impossible.
Finally, when will God complete redemption? Rev. 5.13 gives a hint.
"And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, 'To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!"
This seems to infer all humans, and they seem to be willingly giving glory to God, I will embrace this greater hope and the ultimate victory of Jesus Christ in His mission to "seek and to save that which is lost."
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.