Precisely. However, I spent 20 years as a Southern Baptist and never had a problem with ECT. My transition came when I began to see
my harsh treatment of those who I believed were " heretics"and were headed to ECT.
For many "believers" the topic of ECT is not a serious concern, mainly because they
assume that they are smarter than the majority of the world and have nothing to worry about since they are involved in a religious congregation that has all the answers.
Judging others based on yourself?
You're taking your information on the Christian faith from someone who thinks the Bible is a flawed book?
And you think "believers" are the one with the problem?
The two most widely held theological definitions of God: Calvinism, God will choose a few; or Arminianism, a few will choose God. Both fail at explaining why God would lose the majority of the world to the "will" of Satan and the "trespass of Adam".
See
Romans 9:22-23.
If traditional models are truly honest with their theological bias they are forced to admit that the act of Christ was unsuccessful. They are forced to admit that both Satan and Adam acts defeated the creator of the universe. And that God's infallible wisdom and desire to redeem all was prevented by a wicked fallen angel and fallible Adam.
Assumes the wrong purpose of God, whose purpose is
never prevented but
always accomplished.
God's "desire" and God's "will" are not the same thing.
What he
desires is
revealed to us, but is not necessarily what he
wills/decrees. (
Deuteronomy 29:29)
What God
desired, he revealed to Pharaoh, "Let my people go," was not what he
willed/decreed for Pharaoh, and explained to Moses before Moses even left Midian for Egypt, "I will harden his heart so that he will not let them go." (
Exodus 4:21)
This of course is the greatest heresy of our generation, and is actually being reformed by
those who are very dedicated to ushering in a new reformation.
YIKES!. . .As in universal salvation?
"Some people claim that Jesus didn’t advocate for justice. They have a point if you think that justice and retribution are necessarily connected. But they are not. Jesus transforms our understanding of justice, not by connecting it with retribution, but with forgiveness.
However, "forgiveness" is an accounting term, which means "cancellation of a debt."
The believer's sin debt to God is cancelled (forgiven) by faith
because Jesus
paid it for him on the cross.
There is no cancellation without payment. . .forgiveness is
not free,
somebody pays!
Jesus taught his disciples to forgive not just 7 times, but 77 times. Obviously, forgiveness isn’t about counting up to 77 times and then quitting. Seven is the symbolic number for completeness in the Hebrew Bible. Using 77 as a hyperbole,
Jesus said we should never stop forgiving.
Precisely. . .because he paid such a high price for the forgiveness of believers.
Believers' unforgiveness reflects a lack of appreciation for the great price Jesus paid for their forgiveness.
But does that mean Jesus didn’t advocate for justice? Are justice and forgiveness opposed to one another? No. Jesus opposed retributive justice. The justice system in the United States is based on punishment. It’s primarily a form of retributive justice. The same was true in ancient Rome. If you committed an act that was against the “justice of Rome,” you would not be forgiven; you’d be killed.
If you commit an act that’s against the “justice of the United States,” you will be punished and possibly killed. Jesus turned that idea of justice upside down. He enacted restorative justice. It’s a justice that isn’t based on retribution. Rather, it’s based on healing our souls and our relationships." -Adam Ericksen
That's drinking the Kool-Aid. . .
That is not the gospel of the NT, but "another gospel". . .of the "new reformation,"
and which the NT
emphatically condemns. . .
ANATHEMA! (
Galatians 1:6-9).
