Reformationist said:
Why do you act as if Calvinists deny that it is by the sovereign hand of God that man even desires to be saved, much less is saved? The love of Christ does compel us, just as the work of God in regeneration compels us unto salvation. It doesn't do so against our will if that is what you claim we espouse.
Compatibalism is not an intellectually honest escape from my criticism. Perhaps you can do better next time.
The peril I believe he was referring to is that which accompanies a hatred for the truth of God's revelation. Like the Roman church who denies that justification by faith alone is the proper and biblical means of God's dispensation of salvitic faith, when you reject that which is foundational to man's salvation you remove from yourself anything to rely on for your salvation.
PSA is not foundational to salvation, the Christian faith, or orthodox theology. In fact, as I have shown, in many ways it is antithetical to the same.
What is utter foolishness is that you believe this to be the inescapable conclusion of the idea of penal substitutionary atonement. It is the love of God for the objects of His mercy that compels Him to die on their behalf.
No, PSA says more than this. It says that God orchestrates the death of Christ in order that God's "punishment" for sin might fall upon Christ. Therefore, you must rephrase your post to say that it is the "love of God for the objects of [God's] mercy that compels [God] to kill Christ on their behalf." While a distorted conception of "love" might be preserved, the intertrinitarian relationship is entirely destroyed.
The Godhead are not at odds and our theology does not paint them that way.
Yes, it is apparent that this is one of your many blindspots. Or one of those areas on which you simply look the other direction and hope no one else notices. Well, many, many have noticed, and we are calling PSA into account.
Your issue is with the idea that there are consequences for rebellion and those consequences need to be executed before mercy can be applied.
But this is just it! There are consequences--natural consequences--for being a sinful human being, i.e., complete and utter separation from God. There is nothing worse that could be heaped upon a human being for that. Therefore, if Christ is dying for some "punishment" that is supposedly going to be tacked on at death, his death is completely wasted as humans will naturally inherit the consequences of their sinfulness.
If they are not then the justice of God, as nobdysfool so clearly pointed out, becomes nonsensical and He violates His own righteous decree.
No, "the justice of God" becomes nonsensical to those who have a false conception of it and make "the justice of God" a slave to their theological agendas.
Another example of your inconsistancy. Here you claim that God's divine act of resurrecting the innocent lamb that was slaughtered by the world vindicates Him and makes it appropriate for God to forgive humanity. You go on to say that Christ's suffering on behalf of mankind enables God to, then, forgive all who are in need of forgiveness. Now, the problem is that three posts prior to this you claim "Forgiveness requires no conditions upon which it becoes fitting. Rather, the very nature of forgiveness is that it is given without condition. A forgiveness earned or merited is not forgiveness." You decry my acknowledgement that Christ's work of supererogation makes it fitting for God to forgive whomsoever He will but say the same thing here.
No, you are misunderstanding my point. I have consistently said that there is no condition upon which forgiveness is based, as if there is something within the object of forgiveness that could merit the forgiveness. However, the
propriety of God's forgivingness of humanity is based upon Christ's death upon the cross and God's subsequent vindication of his life of perfect fidelity to the will of God. In this sense, through the work of Christ God becomes the ultimate victim of humanity's sin and it is therefore proper that God's forgiveness can be extended to all of humanity. After all, one who has not been wronged cannot forgive--such would be a feigned forgiveness.
He didn't consult you or need your contribution to effect forgiveness.
I completely agree. Such is the reason why God's forgiveness has been extended to all of humanity, precisely because there is no condition within anyone upon which God's forgiveness of them could be based.
He will forgive whomsoever He will and, as the Bible explicitly states, it is not based on your works or your desires but, rather, on the fact that He is a merciful God.
I agree, but would correct the first sentence by saying that God has forgiven all. This is precisely the reason why any can be reconciled to God.
Do you believe that "God" (I'll assume you're talking about the Father) was willing to forgive without the substitutionary death of Christ?
Yes, God [speaking as the Godhead] was not only willing, but has extende3d the gift of forgiveness to humanity. The Cross is the demonstration of God's forgiveness.
The rest of your post truly falls in the catagory of "rubbish" and has been addressed previously so I will bypass directly addressing it here.
Nice. I'll assume that you are unable to answer the issues that I raise.
