Questions for Synergists

[janxharris]

The problem is that you ignore context.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

You are right that these words were spoken to The Israelites.

However, you would not deny, I think, that Gentiles have gone astray like sheep and have turned to their own way. The context of ch. 53 concerns Jesus as the suffering servant i.e. His first coming and His crucifixion.

Edit:

v. 3
He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

Gentiles were there despising Him too - Acts 4:27.

 

[Hammster]

Doesn't 1 John 2:2 establish that Jesus died for all ungodly people - 'the whole world'?

Oz

That would depend on the definition of propitiation. Also, it would depend if you're a universalist.

If it could be argued that propitiation is something other than God's wrath being satisfied, then maybe. Then it's possible that Christ died for every person who has ever lived or will live.

Or, if one uses propitiation correctly, and believes in universalism, then it could be said that Christ died for every person who has ever lived or will live.

However, if God's wrath was only satisfied against those who would believe, then "whole world" will have to mean all types of people (an acceptable use in scripture), and not every persons who has ever lived, or will live.

Or, it could be argued

 

[Hammster]

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

You are right that these words were spoken to The Israelites.

However, you would not deny, I think, that Gentiles have gone astray like sheep and have turned to their own way. The context of ch. 53 concerns Jesus as the suffering servant i.e. His first coming and His crucifixion.

He died for the sheep. Some of the sheep were in Israel. Some were not. See John 10.

 

[janxharris]

He died for the sheep. Some of the sheep were in Israel. Some were not. See John 10.

What has what you say in this post got to do with Isaiah 53? You are linking the sheep mentioned in jn 10 Isa 53?

v. 3
He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

Gentiles were there despising Him too - Acts 4:27.

 

[Hammster]

What has what you say in this post got to do with Isaiah 53? You are linking the sheep mentioned in jn 10 Isa 53?

v. 3
He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

Gentiles were there despising Him too - Acts 4:27.

Yes, they were. There are general statements, and there are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53.

 

[janxharris]

He died for the sheep. Some of the sheep were in Israel. Some were not. See John 10.

Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem. Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

He was despised and rejected by mankind. So the 'people, 'we', 'our', 'us' and 'all' that follow are in the context of mankind.

Mankind there at the time of Jesus rejected him and mankind, now, reject him spiritually. Many are called, few are chosen.

 

[janxharris]

Yes, they were. There are general statements, and there are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53.

Why do you link them?

All we like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way;

All have gone astray as sheep go astray - one goes astray and the rest follow.

 

[Hammster]

Why do you link them?

All we like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way;

All have gone astray as sheep go astray - one goes astray and the rest follow.

The elect are just as the non-elect in that they need to be saved. There's no difference. But you are either ignoring that there are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53, or you are pretending that it was written to all of humanity.

 

[janxharris]

The elect are just as the non-elect in that they need to be saved. There's no difference. But you are either ignoring that there are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53, or you are pretending that it was written to all of humanity.

There are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53. What of them?

 

[Hammster]

There are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53. What of them?

They refer to God's people. Those are the ones Christ died for.

 

[Hammster]

It is usually the synergist's contention that the following are true:

-God is doing everything He can to keep people out of hell
-God wishes that every single human being escape hell and end up in heaven
-God treats everyone perfectly equally for the sake of fairness, regarding their salvation

If those are all true, I have some questions for my synergist brothers and sisters:

1) God foreknew whether every single person in the race would believe or not, before he created them. For example, God knew that if he created Bob, Bob would never believe and end up in hell. Why did God create Bob, then? If God doesn't want any human being to end up in hell, why didn't God only create those human beings he foreknew would willingly believe? That way, he'd have an entire human race of willing believers, and nobody in hell.

2) Why do some people die earlier than others? Some people die at age 15 in tragic car accidents, before they had a chance to give the gospel some consideration and submit to Jesus. However, other people live until nearly 100 years of age, and more. Is that fair? Why didn't God give those two people an equal opportunity? He can easily extend the lives of all human beings so that they live the maximum amount of time in order to make the all important decision of turning to Jesus.

3) (This question is aimed at synergists who believe one can lose his/her salvation) Since God is in control of when we live or die, if you can lose your salvation, why doesn't God kill you during the time you are in the "saved state"? Isn't He doing everything he can do to keep you out of hell?

4) Speaking of fairness, if God desperately wishes everyone would be saved, why does He allow such diverse situations in the human race? For example, some Americans are born in the Bible belt where there is a church on every corner, access to TV channels where the gospel is proclaimed, access to people in their neighbourhoods and schools and work places who are Christians, for the possibility of interacting with those Christians and receiving the gospel message or seeing the Lord work the lives of those people as a powerful testimony to the fact that God does indeed change lives.

Other people are born in remote jungle tribes who have no idea who Jesus is, no access to missionaries, no TV channels, etc. The American person in our example lives a comfortable life so he has plenty of time to sit and ponder whether there is truth to the Bible's claims. The other person in the jungle doesn't even know what the Bible is, much less have time to sit around pondering such things, as he is more concerned with surviving and drinking fresh water. In fact, if he came across a Bible, it might not even be in his language.

Is that fair? Did God truly give the same chance and opportunity to these two people?

Ask any missionary and they will tell you there are huge amounts of people groups that have never heard the name of Jesus. Not only in uncivilized parts of the world, but in civilized parts, too.

In some countries, Christianity is illegal. Do Chinese people have the same chance as Americans? Americans can go to a Christian church freely to ask questions about Jesus and ponder eternal, spiritual things. Certain countries in Asia, not so much. Is that really equal and fair?

5) More on fairness: Both angels and humans are guilty for sin. God provided a salvation plan for humans, but none for angels. There is no plan of redemption for fallen angels.

Is that fair?

Did anyone actually answer any of these? Or was there just equivocation? Or flat out ignoring?

 

[janxharris]

The elect are just as the non-elect in that they need to be saved. There's no difference. But you are either ignoring that there are personal pronouns in Isaiah 53, or you are pretending that it was written to all of humanity.

Essentially you are saying that, as long as I (Hammster) am sure that I am part of the elect then I can deal with the troubling doctrine of God picking out a select few whilst passing over others. God foreordaining every event leaves no possibility of free choices, so you cannot argue that man is responsible.

This ontological view is dire.

 

[janxharris]

They refer to God's people. Those are the ones Christ died for.

Do you agree that all men (without exception) have despised Jesus? Even without knowing of his existence, men have despised him in their conscience. Do you deny this?

Salvation is available to all when considered from an in time perspective.

 

[Hammster]

Essentially you are saying that, as long as I (Hammster) am sure that I am part of the elect then I can deal with the troubling doctrine of God picking out a select few whilst passing over others.

More arguments from emotion.

God foreordaining every event leaves no possibility of free choices, so you cannot argue that man is responsible.

Not so.

This ontological view is dire.

More emotionalism.

 

[Hammster]

Do you agree that all men (without exception) have despised Jesus? Even without knowing of his existence, men have despised him in their conscience. Do you deny this?

Yes, but it's irrelevant. We are speaking about what a particular passage says, not what we can read into it.

Salvation is available to all when considered from an in time perspective.

Non sequitur.

 

[OzSpen]

Did anyone actually answer any of these? Or was there just equivocation? Or flat out ignoring?

That's what some of us do with straw man arguments.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Yes, but it's irrelevant. We are speaking about what a particular passage says, not what we can read into it.

Non sequitur.

Is this the pot calling the kettle black?

 

[Hammster]

That's what some of us do with straw man arguments.

Oz

So you equivocated. Thanks for your honesty.

 

[Hammster]

Is this the pot calling the kettle black?

No.

 

[janxharris]

More arguments from emotion.
Not so.

More emotionalism.

1. Did God foreordain all events?
2. Did God foreordain that each man's will would be just so?
3. Can a man alter his foreordained will?

No Calvinist on these forums has been able to explain compatibilism; indeed, an admission of the difficulties involved has been forthcoming.

What are your feelings towards those that you say God passed over?