If God doesn't want anyone in hell...

[Marvin Knox]

OK!

So what do you say we all get back on track now?

Skala,

Just to get us back to the original question in the OP – I’ll go out on a big limb and offer my personal view of what I see God doing as indicated in scripture.

Short and sweet (and all too flawed with my human understanding) – it goes something like this.

The Father has always been about displaying His attributes (glory) in His Son. The Son has always been about reflecting that glory back to His Father.

The Son is the "Word of God".

God talks about “magnifying” His glory through this world. This world is the work of His Son as the Son has been given from the Father to display.

One of the inherent attributes of God is “the knowledge of good and evil.” Evil is anything that doesn’t return glory to the Father as must be. Sin is missing the mark of the absolute glorification of God.

Let it be emphasized that God is not both good and evil. He is only good. But He has full knowledge of every way that evil can occur. There is no limit to His knowledge of evil just as He knows Himself fully as being altogether good. In fact evil is only present when shown in juxtaposition with righteousness.

Just as with every other infinite attribute of God – God’s intention is to display this knowledge of good and evil. But God does not wish to display this knowledge over and over and over again in every age to come. He wants to get on with the job of glorifying Himself by the display of His infinite glory without respect to evil. But first the knowledge of good and evil must be displayed so that it can be seen in the ages to come for what it is.

What we see in this age IMO is a contained or “quarantined” - once for all - display of this knowledge of good and evil. Every aspect of evil is on display in this age – at least in representative form. This age will continue until He is satisfied that it has been shown once for all the consequences of not returning all glory to God, the source of all things. After that He will continue to display Himself through His Son in the ages to come without allowing evil to enter His creations, whatever they may be.

This display of the knowledge of good and evil is not only being carried out in this realm. It is being carried out (perhaps in a many times greater degree) in the Heavenly, angelic realm as well.

God has established the order of things so that the evil displayed here in this age proceeds only from the rebellious creation and only good is seen in Him.

God will use the resulting necessary consequences of evil and sin that are being shown in this age, to display the results of this presently allowed evil throughout the ages. He may be going to use it to “justify”, as it were, His not allowing free choice with regard to sin in the future ages. Or perhaps He will allow sin to occur and immediately judge it- with the results of this age serving as His reason for doing so for all to see. I think the former is what He will do. But it may be all for another reason altogether than I can’t think of now.

All things were created by and for God’s Son and they occur “in Him” as well. The necessary wrath of God that results from evil is poured out on His Son. At the same time the Son receives glory and honor for His returning of all glory to His Father.

Hell (perhaps with the omnipresent Christ bearing the wrath of God along with those He died for who would not believe on Him) will display His righteous judgment. All things are reconciled and displayed in the Son – even sin itself.

The reigning Christ, along with His redeemed bride, will display eternally His faithfulness and obedience. We will display in the ages to come His mercy, kindness, forgiveness, and grace. Just as Hell will display His righteous and necessary wrath.

In the ages to come, God will eternally be receiving magnified glory through His Son as it has always been.

In this age as well, God receives glory through the display of Himself through His Son. Even now, in this fallen state, the earth is filled with the glory of God.

If I am anywhere near correct in the way I see things, I can hardly wait for Him to bring the activities of His Son in this age to a conclusion. We cannot even imagine what is in store for us from out of His infinite mind and being in the ages to come. As I see it, all that occurs after this age will be without any display of evil at all except as men and angels see it from what went on in this particular age. A display such as we see now will be finished forever.

I say again - that this is merely my ideas about what it is all about. But I have gleaned these views from my knowledge of the scripture and I have reviewed chapter and verse of where I got my opinion.

Admittedly this has been as short and sweet as I can make it for this thread's purposes.

My view is more amenable with the Reformed view than the other side of the debate we often see. But it is not, per se, Calvinism.

If someone has a better idea - particularly from a more Arminian or free will side - let's hear it.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

A small clean up was done.

Folks, let's not make it personal

 

[hedrick]

Limited Atonement says that what God was trying to accomplish was the infallible, guaranteed salvation of the elect.
Unlimited Atonement says that God was trying to accomplish merely making all people savable.

I think this is a caricature of unlimited atonement. As far as I know, those who hold an unlimited atonement believe it was God’s intention to save people. Certainly 4-point Calvinists do.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I think this is a caricature of unlimited atonement. As far as I know, those who hold an unlimited atonement believe it was God’s intention to save people. Certainly 4-point Calvinists do.

The arguments put forth by Bruce Ware (with some small caveats) are fairly close to the way I see things.

http://evangelicalarminians.org/files/Ware. Extent of the Atonement.pdf

I believe this document represents what most would call the average 4 point Calvinist's position.

 

[hedrick]

The usual 5-point argument is that Arminians say that Christ made it possible for people to redeem themselves, but did not do the redemption of any specific person himself.

I don’t think Ware produces the best answer to this. I would think the best answer would use the Arminian concept of election in Christ. Christ’s death redeems those who have faith in him. At least under the normal doctrine of God, God knew there would be such people, indeed in his grace he made sure of that, even though people’s own will is also involved. So Christ’s death doesn’t just set up a possibility which might or might not happen, it redeems a specific set of people. And they certainly do not redeem themselves, although they participate in the decision of whether or not they become followers of Christ.

You can still turn that argument around, but it involves rhetorical tricks rather than anything real.

At any rate, an argument that depends upon God’s intention seems peculiarly dangerous. All we know about his intention is that many places say he wants all to be redeemed. But how exactly this is reconciled with the fact that not all are is something not clearly answered in Scripture. Indeed I don’t think we know what God actually is. “Intention” is a concept that really applies to humans, who think in a linear, discursive way. Does God even reason in the same way? I think we should be wary of trying to figure out just how his decision-making works, except to the extent that it’s revealed, and are sure that the revelation is intended as an actual description of his thought process and not an analogy.

Thus I can’t help wondering whether this whole debate even makes sense from God’s perspective.

 

[Marvin Knox]

At any rate, an argument that depends upon God’s intention seems peculiarly dangerous. All we know about his intention is that many places say he wants all to be redeemed. But how exactly this is reconciled with the fact that not all are is something not clearly answered in Scripture. Indeed I don’t think we know what God actually is. “Intention” is a concept that really applies to humans, who think in a linear, discursive way. Does God even reason in the same way? I think we should be wary of trying to figure out just how his decision-making works, except to the extent that it’s revealed, and are sure that the revelation is intended as an actual description of his thought process and not an analogy.

Thus I can’t help wondering whether this whole debate even makes sense from God’s perspective.

Agreed!

It isn't really necessary (or even possible) to figure out exactly how these things work in the mind of God.

I have a few caveats with the Ware article myself, as I said.

The thing that I do say quite often to my 5-point friends is that I believe that the full on 5-point view of limited atonement requires some human logic to come up with. To subscribe to it requires, IMO, that there be no other way to look at the atonement except limited atonement without doing some disservice to the work of Christ. From my point of view, this is flawed logic in that I, just for instance, can think of several ways these things can be viewed - none of which do any disservice to the accomplishments of Christ at Calvary.

If there are other options - why talk about "limited" atonement when it is so offensive to many. The point about "intention" is well covered by the other 4 points of Calvinism IMO.

Granted that those who stress "intention" when defining limited atonement are not as offensive as others who seem to mean it in the very way that is so offensive to the other side. But it really is unnecessary to refer to limited atonement at all and drive so many away from considering the other doctrines of grace.

 

[Job8]

Why did he create people that He knew, if He created them, would go to hell? He could have simply opted to not create those people, sparing them from that fate. But he created them anyways.

Sure God could have simply created robots who would always do His bidding. He chose instead to created humans in His image and in His likeness, which also allowed them to make free choices. Men (mankind) were created to freely choose to love and obey God.

He could have simply looked into the future to see who would, if he created the human race, use their free wills to cooperate with his salvation plan, and thus He'd have a whole human race of 100% saved people, and hell would be empty. Why didn't he do that?

Because He prefers voluntary worship and service. BTW Hell was created for the Devil and his angels.

Please note that saying "God wanted us to make a choice" doesn't answer the question, because in my above example, I said that God could have simply created only those people he knew would freely make the right choice.

Sure He could have, but He did not. After all, this is His universe, and His plan of redemption was behind everything. God would not leave humans to be simply humans, but God had a higher goal in mind -- children of God, heirs of God, kings and priests eternally. Hence everything else.

If God doesn't want anyone in hell, why did he give us the ability to be sinful? In heaven, after resurrection when we have glorified bodies, we won't be able to sin. We will be sinless forevermore, like Jesus. If God can do that then, why didn't He did that now? Why didn't he make the human race sinless from the beginning?

He did make Adam and Eve sinless, but they "messed up". Don't blame God.

If God doesn't want anyone in hell, why did he allow the snake to come within 50 miles of Eve, and have that conversation with her? Was God unaware of what the snake was doing?

For creatures with free will, their obedience must be tested to determine if it is genuine or false. No one compelled Eve to have a dialogue with the Devil. And no one compelled Adam to stand by uselessly and then disobey deliberately. Blame those two for the mess of the human race.

The reason I ask these questions is because there's two worldviews out there, two theologies, two soteriologies. One of them cannot offer intellectually satisfactory answers, but the other can.

There can be only one true soteriology, so make up your mind and stick with it. God gave men the capacity to choose God and Christ over the Devil and the world. And God says that even creation reveals His power and Godhead, therefore all men are without excuse. God says "Choose you this day whom ye will serve..."

 

[nobdysfool]

Sure God could have simply created robots who would always do His bidding. He chose instead to created humans in His image and in His likeness, which also allowed them to make free choices. Men (mankind) were created to freely choose to love and obey God.

Because He prefers voluntary worship and service. BTW Hell was created for the Devil and his angels.

Sure He could have, but He did not. After all, this is His universe, and His plan of redemption was behind everything. God would not leave humans to be simply humans, but God had a higher goal in mind -- children of God, heirs of God, kings and priests eternally. Hence everything else.

He did make Adam and Eve sinless, but they "messed up". Don't blame God.

For creatures with free will, their obedience must be tested to determine if it is genuine or false. No one compelled Eve to have a dialogue with the Devil. And no one compelled Adam to stand by uselessly and then disobey deliberately. Blame those two for the mess of the human race.

There can be only one true soteriology, so make up your mind and stick with it. God gave men the capacity to choose God and Christ over the Devil and the world. And God says that even creation reveals His power and Godhead, therefore all men are without excuse. God says "Choose you this day whom ye will serve..."

Is man morally neutral with regard to the Gospel? Can man make this choice on his own, of his own initiative?

Those two things are required for your view to be true. Yes, Adam and Eve screwed up, and in so doing condemned the entire human race to be sinners. And make no mistake, we are born sinners. Sin is not something we learn, it is who we are.

And the one thing your view cannot adequately deal with, is that God intended it to be that way. We aren't living under "Plan B". He didn't have a contingency plan "just in case" Adam and Eve blew it. He knew they would, and knew it from before He created anything. To say anything other than God intended it to be this way is to say, in effect, that He isn't really good at being God, He just kind of bumbles along, cleaning up messes, and having to readjust His Plan and Purpose, based on what those pesky humans do.

In your view, you'd think He would have learned something after 1/3 of the angels rebelled along with Lucifer. But no, He decided to create a world, and human beings, in the hope that they wouldn't screw up like Lucifer and the Angels did. Your bible says differently.

It's either that, or all that we see, is exactly and precisely as God intended, down to the smallest detail. One of the things we must do, is to trust Him in all of this, Trust that He knows what He's doing, even if we don't see any way that this could be good. To Him it IS good. He brings good out of the evil that men intend. Every time. Even if we don't see it. We don't serve a weak, bumbling, scatterbrained God, we serve the Sovereign Lord God Almighty, who is in complete control of His creation down to the smallest sub-atomic particle. Men freely choose what God intends, 100% of the time.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Is man morally neutral with regard to the Gospel? Can man make this choice on his own, of his own initiative?

I believe this type of question is false. The initiative has already been taken, and that by God Himself. How so? The cross. He provided the solution to Adam's rebellion which cursed the human race in spiritual death. Since God has already taken the initiative, all man can do is respond to God's initiative and love by accepting the free gift that He promises to those who believe in His Son for salvation.

The only choice for man is whether to accept God's gift, which is through faith. There would be no "initiative" on the part of man. Only response to God's initiative.

And the one thing your view cannot adequately deal with, is that God intended it to be that way. We aren't living under "Plan B". He didn't have a contingency plan "just in case" Adam and Eve blew it. He knew they would, and knew it from before He created anything. To say anything other than God intended it to be this way is to say, in effect, that He isn't really good at being God, He just kind of bumbles along, cleaning up messes, and having to readjust His Plan and Purpose, based on what those pesky humans do.

It's an error to claim that God "intended" for Adam and Eve to mess up by sin. Certainly He knew they would. But the word "intend" has a connotation that cannot be applied to God.

Man intends to do do a lot of things, many of which will NEVER be done. But he still intended that they would be. With God, that is impossible. So let's not use "intended" with God.

He never "intends" anything. He actually DOES things. Or prevents things. Hew doesn't have to intend anything.

Men freely choose what God intends, 100% of the time.

So, where does the Bible teach that the rejection of the free gift of salvation was "intended" by God?

I find the exact opposite teaching:
1 Tim 2:3,4 - 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

 

[Job8]

Men freely choose what God intends, 100% of the time.

This is not only problematic theology, but makes God ultimately resposible for every atrocity ever committed. That's a serious charge to bring against a holy and righteous God.
But this is exactly what happens when men pervert the teaching on the sovereignty of God.

The truth is that God hates sin and evil, but allows it to exist for a "season" until Christ establishes true righteousness, peace and prosperity on this earth. He does not "intend" anyone to do evil, since He has clearly forbidden everything that is evil, and He has warned evildoers of their ultimate fate in Hell.

 

[Marvin Knox]

We all agreed that God “knew” that man would sin. But we cannot pick one second in the entire history of the world and work backward and forward from there.

If God knew that men would sin, God also knew that the actions He undertook before that sin would result in that sin. If God knew that men would sin, God also knew the results of that sin right down to the crucifixion, the redemption of fallen men and, eventually, the White Throne Judgment, the Lake of Fire, the new Heavens and the new earth, and indeed every other consequence of that sin.

Every event that He knew would take place in history requires the involvement of God at the most minute level of the very existence of all things created and everything else providentially concerned with His creation throughout history – as the scriptures clearly teach.

Since it was His conscious decision beforehand for all of these things to take place – He was, in that conscious decision along with His very first act in that progression of events, ”predestining” all of the things that were to occur in the history of His creation.

To refresh our memories those things include the creation, the indwelling, and sustaining of all things in that creation throughout history. They also included the rebellion of Satan, the fall of man, the sins that followed that fall, His divine acts of redemptions- and the summing up of all things in Jesus Christ.

The predestination by God of all things that occur in His creation in the unavoidable conclusion any thinking man must draw when first He agrees to the omniscience of our God.

No need for anyone to use the term "intent" as long as the term "predestination" is used instead.

By the way - those "predestined" events include the choices of men and angels - both for the good and for the bad.

 

[nobdysfool]

This is not only problematic theology, but makes God ultimately resposible for every atrocity ever committed. That's a serious charge to bring against a holy and righteous God.
But this is exactly what happens when men pervert the teaching on the sovereignty of God.

What is problematic here is the simplistic idea that God's creation of the long set of circumstances which include sin, and the sins of men and of angels, makes Him personally responsible for those acts. And the usual accusation is made that those who believe thus are charging God with evil, having a "monster god", "perverting the teachings on the Sovereignty of God", and all the other emotion-driven accusations which are made, which do not actually refute such charges, due to the substitution of emotion for fact.

The truth is that God hates sin and evil, but allows it to exist for a "season" until Christ establishes true righteousness, peace and prosperity on this earth. He does not "intend" anyone to do evil, since He has clearly forbidden everything that is evil, and He has warned evildoers of their ultimate fate in Hell.

Given that man is fallen, man is justly deserving of Hell, precisely because he does evil and sins. God allowing that is for a greater purpose. That's what is being missed here. God allowing men to sin and do evil is not causing them to do it, thus men are responsible for their actions. Permission does not equal causation. And that permission IS predestination, for the reasons that Marvin has carefully laid out.

 

[Job8]

No need for anyone to use the term "intent" as long as the term "predestination" is used instead.

The correct Bible term is "foreknowledge", which is not the same as "predestination". Predestined would mean that God purposed all the evil that exists. Foreknowledge means that He knew it would occur and allowed it for His own reasons. Big difference.

 

[Job8]

Duplicated. No delete button available.

 

[Job8]

Duplicated.

 

[Marvin Knox]

The correct Bible term is "foreknowledge", which is not the same as "predestination".

I agree that foreknowledge is not the same as predestination. That's why I didn't say that it was.

You are wrong in saying that the correct Bible term for what I have been talking about is foreknowledge. The correct Bible term for what I have been talking about is predestination.

Predestined would mean that God purposed all the evil that exists.
Foreknowledge means that He knew it would occur and allowed it for His own reasons.

If you want to use the word allowed - that's fine by me - no problem. So long as you agree that God Himself is intimately involved in everything that He "allows". And so long as you agree that without His intimate involvement those things would never be able to happen.

Foreknowledge does indeed mean that He knew what would happen if He Himself were to do and allowed certain things. You are correct in that.

When you say that these things are allowed for His own reasons, you are saying very clearly that He has His own purposes for doing and allowing all things that happen in this world.

You say that "predestined" equates to "purpose". If we assume that your definition of predestined is correct and it does mean as you say that God purposed all the evil that exists - you would be correct.

Big difference.

According to what you said in your own prior statements - No difference.

But just to be perfectly clear - It is not His possessing the foreknowledge of what could happen that is the same as predestining something to happen. It is His acting on that possibility in such a way that makes it an assured reality that is the same as predestining something to happen.

There is no mysterious eternal force that causes God to create, indwell, and bring to past all that happens. There are no such things as fate and chance - those are not our Gods.

There is only the one true God with His infinite purposes that brings to past all that happens.

The fact that nothing can happen unless He sends forth His word to fully accomplish all that He intends to happen - makes the predestination of all things that happen in His creation an inescapable conclusion.

 

[bling]

No - God is not outside of anything.

No - God is not limited by human time..

First you say God is inside of time which means time is greater than God in at least that aspect, but than you say: God is not limited by time, so which is it?

We don't know.

If God is not limited by time than time would have to be completely relative to God, by definition of “not being limited”.

It is an unwarranted leap to say that the future is only man's future. .

I am just restating what you said in a different way: “God is not limited by human time”, so God would not have a future related to man’s future.

Time exists in this physical realm where men exist (and anyone else out there in this physical universe exists as well).

Time also exists in the present Heaven where angels and other beings exist and function.

Time will exist in the new Heaven and Heavens and on the new earth as well..

Does God exist in both physical and spiritual realms at the same time?

Just because God/Bible use anthropomorphic wording to make it easier for humans to understand the message about heaven does not mean heaven has time like human time here on earth.

We don't know that. We only know what we are told.

God speaks of His activities before this creation in which we live in time like terms.

God speaks of His activities now in time like terms.

God speaks of His activities in the future in time like terms.

The inhabitants of Heaven (in God's presence) sing - requiring time to do so.

God sings over us, His children - requiring sequential activities to do so.

Worship of God in Heaven is described as including successive actions such as casting crowns before God, falling down in worship, and approaching the throne.

Beings fly around from one place to another in Heaven.

All events in Heaven (in God's presence) occur sequentially, one after another.

The inhabitants of Heaven (in God's presence) rejoice the "moment" a sinner repents.

The saints in Heaven (in God's presence) ask how long until God will judge the earth. They are told to "wait a little longer" - indicating time in God's presence.

God is served "day and night" in His temple.

There was "silence in Heaven for about half an hour.".

It is an either/or scenario, so God is either limited/restricted by time or is not limited by time moves freely between man’s time.

Bottom line, bling, is that we should not go beyond what is written concerning God and His perception of time.

Is God omnipresent in heaven?

Is there any night in heaven?

Heavenly beings may not be omnipresent but God is?

The important thing for us to know is that, in so far as our world (this creation) goes - events all unfold in time. For that to happen they needed to be not only predestined to do so. Creation needed to be spoken into reality. All things and events in this creation are carried along in time by the indwelling providentially controlling Word of God - just as He intended them to be.

Yes, we are trapped on an earthly time line here on earth, but contrary to what you say; “predestined to do so”, it can all be happening simultaneously for God. God can certainly foreordain most everything, but if God wants man to have Godly type Love like God’s Love each human will have to make a free will sovereign choice. God knows the choice we made, but that does not prevent it from being our choice.

 

[Marvin Knox]

First you say God is inside of time which means time is greater than God in at least that aspect, but than you say: God is not limited by time, so which is it?

If God is not limited by time than time would have to be completely relative to God, by definition of “not being limited”.

I am just restating what you said in a different way: “God is not limited by human time”, so God would not have a future related to man’s future.

Does God exist in both physical and spiritual realms at the same time?

Just because God/Bible use anthropomorphic wording to make it easier for humans to understand the message about heaven does not mean heaven has time like human time here on earth.

It is an either/or scenario, so God is either limited/restricted by time or is not limited by time moves freely between man’s time.

Is God omnipresent in heaven?

Is there any night in heaven?

Heavenly beings may not be omnipresent but God is?

Yes, we are trapped on an earthly time line here on earth, but contrary to what you say; “predestined to do so”, it can all be happening simultaneously for God. God can certainly foreordain most everything, but if God wants man to have Godly type Love like God’s Love each human will have to make a free will sovereign choice. God knows the choice we made, but that does not prevent it from being our choice.

When we talk about predestination we are talking about the predestination of things that happen in this creation. Time is likely a part of God's creation.

It wouldn't be right to talk about the predestination of anything outside of time- and I am not doing that.

For instance we don't talk about the predestination of God's having a Son or having a Holy Spirit or having any of His attributes because they are eternal. They have nothing to do with time and therefore predestination isn't applicable.

As I have stated here over and over and over again - omniscience or foreknowledge does not equate to predestination.

Creating time and then acting in time so as to bring the things that He knows will happen to past eventually and necessarily within time - does equate to predestining those things to happen.

God certainly knows all that can happen and He knows what will happen if He does certain things. In His infinite mind (outside of time as well as in time I would suppose) He has all knowledge.

But (one more time) having that knowledge has nothing to do with His predestining anything that happens in this creation. At least it doesn't from our perspective. It is when He speaks so as to bring it all to past that equates to predestination.

But, bling, none of these frail human ramblings about the mind of God matters at all to the discussion at hand.

Let's just leave it at that.

The discussion started by Skala has to do with Hell and why God allows anyone to go there when He could prevent it in any number of ways.

 

[xpower]

Doctrine of Salvation http://www.reasonablefaith.org/defenders-2-podcast/s11

 

[bling]

.

As I have stated here over and over and over again - omniscience or foreknowledge does not equate to predestination..

I totally agree. God could have perfect foreknowledge/omniscience of our few free will sovereign choices, without them being predestined or foreordained.

.
Creating time and then acting in time so as to bring the things that He knows will happen to past eventually and necessarily within time - does equate to predestining those things to happen..

I agree: “those things” are very much predestined/foreordained, but that does not mean everything is predestined.

.
God certainly knows all that can happen and He knows what will happen if He does certain things. In His infinite mind (outside of time as well as in time I would suppose) He has all knowledge..

Fully agree.

.
But (one more time) having that knowledge has nothing to do with His predestining anything that happens in this creation. At least it doesn't from our perspective. It is when He speaks so as to bring it all to past that equates to predestination..

Agreed, but God does not “speak” man’s free will sovereign choices, but does have foreknowledge of them.

.
But, bling, none of these frail human ramblings about the mind of God matters at all to the discussion at hand.

Let's just leave it at that..

No they really do.

.
The discussion started by Skala has to do with Hell and why God allows anyone to go there when He could prevent it in any number of ways.

There is no way to change history. At the exact same “time” God decides to make a person (this could be at the beginning of our “time”), that person was made, lived, died and went to heaven or hell, so that person’s history was made immediately upon God deciding to make that person and history cannot be changed. It is the history of earth throughout earth’s existence.

God could decide to make another world, but that still does not change the history that was made in the first world.