A respector of persons? How so, given that the Reformed view is one of unconditional election?[/qoute] Yes, unconditional for some, condemnation to all others. Diametrically opposed to what scripture actually says and teaches, at least as far as the Apostles are concerned and which has been preserved faithfully for 2000 years by the Holy Spirit.
You said that Christ saved every human being. So, are there saved people in hell, or did Christ only potentially save all men on the cross (but didn't actually save anyone on the cross)?
Absolutely, check the texts above and many more than that. He very specifically, and effectively, saved every human being from the judgement of Adam, death. Besides that, He also atoned, paid the penalty of our personal sins, for all of mankind as well. However, that is potential, because forgiveness of those sins only comes with repentance. So, no man was left untouched, real and potential. The second part(atonement) would have been totally useless without the first part.(overcoming death).
Exodus 4:21And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.
God will harden Pharaoh's heart so that he will not let them go. It doesn't say "but Pharaoh will harden his own heart and not let them go." There is no room for your interpretation here, sojo.
Precisely, because even wicked men do love, show mercy, and God wanted to use Pharaoh to show His power. It says God took the choice away for a moment because in the long of it, it would not matter in Pharaoh life to do so.
Effective: Having an intended or expected effect.
yes, God wills, and desires, influences, even in His providence can work to lead men, but He will not violate His own will that He impose His on man's in this respect - salvation. Salvation is Union with God, and God created man to be free and independent so that God could commune and be in Union in a mutual relationship, not an arrangement.
If man aligns his will with God, God will effectively, without exception bring that persons salvation to fruition - being in Union with Him.
So His will is not realized, but His power is always effective? Do you see the paradox created here?
No paradox at all. His will is that He not impose on man's freedom to love and obey freely. Your theology would need to show why God let Adam slip. What applies to Adam applies to us, especially now that we are again free from bondage of the judgement against Him.
So in your view, now that Christ has died and has risen, are men born completely free from the effects of Adam's transgression? Or is this freedom conferred later in life?
No, we are still born in our sinful nature. But because that nature has been given life, realized at His second coming, God also provided atonement for the sins which we will commit living with sinful natures, in a sinful world, and thwarted by the devil. That is why Paul speaks of the war between fallen flesh and the regenerated spirit of man. It is our responsiblity, not God's, to work with God, to overcome that fallen flesh, to live our life in the spirit. Make sure the spirit dominates and we can only do that with the Gifts, Grace that He has provided to us. But we are free to deny them, to reject them, to change our minds for whatever reason. Adam is the same human being as we are, free. We can leave the communion the same way he did.
Therefore, the freedom is now, so we can begin to be in UNION with Christ, here and now. Christ's saving work provided the means by which man can have the spiritual walk, the spiritual communion, we call Union with God.
Already dealt with capricious. The puppets comment is laughable. God does not compel or force man to sin
I didn't say that, but that is also true of your view. You have taken the will of man away. He no longer can make choices, he is compelled to move to the puppeteers moves. Obviously, you believe man still sins without the Holy Spirit actually doing it, so then you have a monumental contradiction. Man is free and he is not free at the same time.
Already dealt with capricious. The puppets comment is laughable. God does not compel or force man to sin. That you equate withholding means and forcing indicates to me that you're arguing from emotion and not reason, because these words have actual meanings which do not support the conclusions you're trying to create with them.
Obviously not in your view, but Scripturally, the logic demands it.
So, I suppose you can continue to throw these terms around in an attempt to tear down my position.
I'm not even attempting to tear your view apart. You are certainly free, or are you, to believe as you will. However, if you are going to claim it is salvation Scripturally understood from the beginning, then you have not begun to show it. You have shown a view, your interpretation, based on a limited number of isolated texts.
but the fact is that I'm content to deal with your position on the level of Scripture and logic, and leave the emotional conclusions unspoken. Can I ask the same of you please?
Have done the same. The problem with your view is based on your interpretation of scripture and thus the logic you apply will always fit the presuppositons and premises, notwithstanding a lot of other parts of scripture to the contrary, as I have pointed out. However, if you can show historically, that the Holy Spirit has preserved your understanding of Scripture from the beginning, then you truly have the correct Biblical understanding.
But having dealt with this many times, you would have difficulty getting out of the 20th century, let alone back to the reformers. The second part is the method you use, doens't seem to lend to any kind of universal gospel, which it is supposed to be, at least scripture says so. There are more views than verses in the Bible, not on this topic, but when all the differences added up, I don't see any gospel.
fail to see how man's independent free will is necessary to "the very principle of being God." It sounds as if you're saying God cannot be God unless man has free will.
Because God created man to be such. To for no reason, change His mind at some point in regard to His supreme, highest created creature and to deny that creature the purpose for which He was created. What kind of God is that?
What I am saying, God would not be God, if He violated His own sovereign plan. At least what has been revealed to us. Everything He has revealed about man, his creation, his purpose in that creation, is suddenly reneged, when in fact, the whole plan hinges around overcoming the fall. Getting man back to his free state, so he can fulfill that created mandate.
What I am saying, is that your view puts man totally out of the picture, he is no longer even human really, cannot commune with God, freely, at least God revealed He wanted man to be free. Man may not like it, Adam thought he could do a better job alone than with God, and true to human nature, that seems the mind of most men even today. They do not need God.
What, in your opinion, is God's sole purpose for creating man?
To have Union with God and bring His creation along with him. Man was created to be prophet, priest and king over God's creation. Man, himself is a union of matter, material -body and the divine - the soul. That is why death is the extinction of man in the form in which he was intended to exist - whole and in communion.
God first needed to reconcile this creation. Bring it back to the form in which it was intended. To give it life instead of death. Then man can have eternal consequences regarding any spiritual communion or Union with God, beginning in this life.
One other view by many protestants regarding Christ's work, not mentioned as yet in these posts, is that the primary work of Christ was to overcome sin. To save man, from sin. His death covered our sins. Theologically, if that was the only reason, even primary reason, man could have communion with God in this life but upon death, his soul and body would be separated eternally, thus extinct and any communion with God would be terminated. Man would cease to exist as he was created to be. Christ first needed to overcome death, give life, so man could be free to choose God, answer His loving call to all men, and begin that movement to be in perfect union with Him and continue in eternity.
Your view, by the way, theologically, would eliminate hell. Man ceases to exist, hell has no purpose. However, man as fully man, living in body and soul, in eternity, will suffer consequences of his freely rejecting his Savior. Those consequences will be the result of his choice at any time in his life, and God will simply mete out the sentence of his choosing.
All the dead will rise, be resurrected with new bodies, be judged, all will be judged, but the judgement for believers is that they will not be condemned. In Christ they are not condemned, but they will be judged, judged according to the works they have done in their lives.