a very long thread

[Scott McCumber]

Jonah was a bullfrog. Remember the song?

 

S

Wrong prohphet Scott, actually, it was Jeremiah...!  
Verne

Yeah, but that's not as funny!

Joy to the world! All the boys and girls! Joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea! Joy to you and me!

S

[Joe Sperling]

Verne----

I should re-phrase what I said below. I said "I can't believe in a God who...."  That makes it sound like I would reject God because of a concept. If the Bible indeed teaches a limited atonement, I must rest assured that God is just and fair, and that my own understanding is limited. God is perfect, and his ways past finding out. Whatever God does, he does perfectly. I rest in the fact that one day all of it will make perfect sense, and we will wonder at the infinte wisdom of God.

--Joe

[editor]

I cannot believe in a God who has created people knowing that they will not receive him, and whose ultimate end is the lake of Fire. The God I see in the Bible has an ultimate end of all-inclusiveness(if one will receive it), and came to die for all--that all might have a chance to receive him.

--Joe

Joe,

Think about what you are saying here.  Of course God has created people whose ultimate end is the Lake of Fire.  Doesn't it say this in the Bible?

He knew this before there was a beginning, IF we believe He is eternal.

He purposed this from the beginning, IF we believe He is Omnipotent

He knew who would believe and who would reject,  IF we believe He is Omniscient

I know that you don't mean to say that God wanted to save everyone, but wasn't able to.

Somehow, in a way that we can't grasp, God chose the elect, and the elect responded to the gospel.  In like manner, God didn't choose those destined for wrath, and they rejected Him.

I have come to the conclusion, that for now, when I read the verses that teach unconditional election, I am going to agree that they teach this.  Conversely, when I come to the parts that teach "Whosoever will," I am going to rejoice in the fact that anyone who calls upon the Name of The Lord will be saved.

Is there any other option?  I have never met a Calvinist who looks at his friend and says,  "You know, you probably weren't chosen, so live life to the fullest.  You are destined to go to hell."   They just don't say this.

Brent

[Joe Sperling]

Brent---

Thanks. See the post just below yours--I must have been typing it just as you posted.

--joe

[editor]

Brent---

Thanks. See the post just below yours--I must have been typing it just as you posted.

--joe

Ah,  yes.

I knew you didn't mean to say that.  A few months ago, when we were studying Romans 9 in our home group,  one of the people present said,

"If God has destined some people to go to Hell, I want no part of Him!"  This dear, sweet Christian woman has family members who are involved in a cult.  The thought that she may not live to see her brother get out is something she cannot bear.

As the discussion progressed,  I made the point,  "So, is their salvation up to your diligence to pray?"  She gave a non-commital answer, except to re-inforce that they sure weren't pre-destined to go to Hell.

I followed up with, "So, if it is up to you to pray, how are you going to deal with it if they don't get out?  Will you hold yourself responsible?"

To me, while I don't agree with all 5-points,  I am greatly comforted in the fact that God chose me.  I know, without a doubt that I would not have chosen Him.  I love Him, because He first loved me.

Think of Saul's conversion on the road to Damascus.  Remember, Christ died for His enemies.....He had no friends.

Brent

[H]

Verne----

I should re-phrase what I said below. I said "I can't believe in a God who...."  That makes it sound like I would reject God because of a concept. If the Bible indeed teaches a limited atonement, I must rest assured that God is just and fair, and that my own understanding is limited. God is perfect, and his ways past finding out. Whatever God does, he does perfectly. I rest in the fact that one day all of it will make perfect sense, and we will wonder at the infinte wisdom of God.

--Joe

Joe,
thanks for posting this, I was a bit worried about you after your previous post.  As you said, God is just and fair and perfect, His ways are past finding out, and His wisdom is infinite. We need to do as the Lord Jesus Christ did and thank the Father that He has "hidden these things from the sophisticated and cunning, and revealed them to babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight." (Mat. 11:25-26, MKJV).
H
 

[sfortescue]

I saw a half dozen seagulls picking over a couple of Del Taco bags in a parking lot yesterday.  Actually they mostly fought over them.  A couple of crows got some that they carelessly left.

[al Hartman]

    ...I am greatly comforted in the fact that God chose me.  I know, without a doubt that I would not have chosen Him.  I love Him, because He first loved me.

Think of Saul's conversion on the road to Damascus.  Remember, Christ died for His enemies.....He had no friends.

Brent

     Amen and Hallelujah!  Thank you Brent for this magnificent encouragement.
     For the benefit of any who have recently joined this bulletin board in progress, and for any who are still puzzling out their assembly experience, I add this:  Paul says in Gal.1:15-16 that although God called him in his adulthood to be a vessel of Christ for the preaching of the gospel, God had set him apart for that purpose "from my mother's womb."  In other words, Saul's persecution of the church and participation in the murders of Christians, which took place between God's setting him apart and God's calling him, while foreknown by God was no deterrent to His plan.
     This is not only thrilling in its own right, but exceedingly good news for us who have been lost upon errant pathways.  God knew us and chose us before we had been formed (cf Jer.1:5), He has seen us in our most secret times (cf Jn.1:48) and patiently awaited our turning to Him.
     There are many schools of thought on why God led, caused, or allowed our sojourn in the wilderness, but what matters is that He chose us before then and He calls to us now!  Come unto Me...

al Hartman

[jesusfreak]

Angels are indeed treated separately, as well as any other given beast of creation.  I have not argued that God had not a purpose in his creation, but simply that Jesus’ "work" extends to all Man universally.  Perhaps I may even more clearly define this to be "all which have knowledge of good and evil"?

Lucas remember men and angels are unique in the creation as being the only creatures the Bible tells us are guilty of "sin". In this respect they are unique as a subset and which is why I compare them on the subject of the atonement.

Let me get rather metaphysical/philosophical here :

I believe that the whole purpose of free will is to allow us to freely choose to live with God in Heaven (ie, to live in the presence of the Beatific Vision). Once this choice is finally and certainly made, the task of the will is done and completed. Thus final choice being made (for humans, death being the end of merit - we cannot choose after death, since Judgment determines our ultimate destination), the will is complete and, if it should continue to exist, it does so like a spent light bulb or spent fuse. Once the ultimate choice is made, it cannot be unmade.

I would hold that angels, as purely rational creatures unencumbered by materiality, the ravages of original sin (concupiscence, among others), the darkening of the intellect/weakening of the will which original sin brings to all men and women as their common lot.........are able to make that ultimate choice in a single moment and without the years of reflection and vacillation that we require (given to us more out of God's mercy than His justice, I would think). In other words, angels have such a keen grasp of things as they truly are that they can make the ultimate decision for God in a spilt second and in the first moment of their being.

Thusly, I would argue that there is no atonement for angels and that they should not exist in this subset....of course, I *do* make several assumptions....

I could equally argue that since some men will indeed go to hell, that Chirst's work was less than "perfect" in the sense you describe as being universally applicable.
[...]
If you acknowledge that some men will go to hell and you also believe the atonement is universally available, then you also of necessity postulate that the atomement was limited in its quality, i.e. less than "perfect".
[...]

If something is available and never appropriated, you cannot logically ever prove that it was indeed available! The only conclusive evidence of availability is appropriation!

Availability has nothing to do Acceptance..........

Granted, I will concede that the only direct proof of its existence would be its utilization.  However, this argument seems to be inherently flawed given the nature of the Work - ie, it could not possibly maintain its "quality" if it becomes limited by conditionals added upon the sheer constitution of Choice.  Such is the nature of the Universe and all things in it?

This takes the message of the power of the gospel out of the realm of fuzzy and fruitless speculation and brings it right down to where we live, breathe, and die...this is starting to have far more practical implication than I ever imgained...a bit scary too no?

aww, the fun is just beginning  

I would argue that this is different from the present day.  Granted, God is outside of time so He must remain constant to Man, but I feel the introduction of Jesus initiated a "period of grace".  Grace extending to all Man; connecting the previous thought.

I fully agree! How would you argue that the way God discriminates is indeed different? We should have some fun with this one...  

I am not fully sure of your question.....God only discriminates based on differences from Himself; always has and always will.  Do you mean how His relations to Man have changed?  

You are most kind. I 've got to get you guys over for some hot chocolate and a roaring fire sometime...
Verne

Just an FYI, I moved out of Ron's house so I am no longer living with Mark.  I am currently living on campus with Dave Haan  

p.s. you did not tell me if you accepted my fundamental premise: that God chooses...

This is not a fair question to ask, without conditions  

Of course God chooses, but His judgments ultimately remain the same.....

--
lucas

[jesusfreak]

God practices discrimination based soley on FAITH!!!!

*wince* technically, you are correct.....but Faith does not exist in a vacuum. Thusly, the absolute disposition of this statement is fraudulent.  

--
lucas

[jesusfreak]

I am so sorry you missed this one Lucas..it was really the key to everything...no amount of  rhetoric, not matter how erudite, will assist here; you either see this or you don't...!I know God will give you wisdom...

Verne

I understand the inferences to your statement, but feel that Faith is too loaded a word to describe your intent.  If you find it to mean, simply, "Confident belief in God", than I would heartedly agree with you.  I would just say this instead of using a Faith full of irrelevant connotations that might confuse, such as "the body of dogma of a religion" or "a set of principles or beliefs".  

*This* is why the disposition of your statement is fraudulent.
*This* is the cause of my wince  

--
lucas

[jesusfreak]

Verne
p.s on reflection, I think I understand your point about my statement being "fraudulent". I am suddenly aware that my supposition that I am talking about a genuine child of God where the presence of faith is presumptive, may not be clear to you Lucas. This is indeed my supposition!

umm, what else would we be talking about?  I think I just didn't make the meaning of my comment clear enough.  I was being critical of the conclusions which may be pulled from your statement, not criticizing its content.  I mean, how else can a statement have a disposition?  

--
lucas

[jesusfreak]

p.s. you did not tell me if you accepted my fundamental premise: that God chooses...

This is not a fair question to ask, without conditions  

Of course God chooses, but His judgments ultimately remain the same.....

--
lucas

Very good. Three final questions.

1. When does God choose?

Following the ultimate choice (detailed several posts below)

--
lucas

[Oscar]

Verne,

You frequently write things like, "God sovereignly chose" or "God's sovereign will".

What is the difference between God's "sovereign" choice or will, and His regular choice or will?

Thomas Maddux

[al Hartman]

Verne,

You frequently write things like, "God sovereignly chose" or "God's sovereign will".

What is the difference between God's "sovereign" choice or will, and His regular choice or will?

Thomas Maddux

     Good catch, Tom.  But I think Verne's point is clearly to emphasize that God's will is sovereign and,therefore, not to be merely considered as weighing against the will of man, but to be respected and honored; loved and feared.

al