Irrisistable Grace?

[bradfordl]

2Co 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, To the church of God that is at Corinth, with all the saints who are in the whole of Achaia:
2Co 1:2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Who was Paul speaking to in this letter? This is a little disengenuous, Cyg, You know that this epistle was written to a Church that had been involved in some error. He was not addressing an assembly of unbelievers. When Paul did address believers, there was none of this idea that there was an open offer to every unbeliever, but he said,
Act 17:22 So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious.
Act 17:23 For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.
Act 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,
Act 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.
Act 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,
Act 17:27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,
Act 17:28 for "'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, "'For we are indeed his offspring.'
Act 17:29 Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man.
Act 17:30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,
Act 17:31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."
Act 17:32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, "We will hear you again about this."
Act 17:33 So Paul went out from their midst.
Act 17:34 But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

He spoke of a command. A king commands laws that he knows not all his subjects will obey, and he affixes punishments for that disobedience. God commands obedience of all, knowing not only some will not obey, but exactly who would not obey, and why they would not obey; because He ordained from before the foundations of the world that they would be vessels of dishonour, to show forth His wrath. Most mocked, some believed and joined Paul. And all that was foreordained by God. It would portray God Himself as "double-minded" to say that there was a "genuine" offer made at Mars Hill. I think your position leads to double-mindedness.

But I'm curious, Cyg. You say you used to be some kind of hard-shell hyper-calvinist or something, and because of that believed that the Gospel was only intended for the elect. I may have that wrong, but in any event you say you hold to this idea that God genuinely desires the reprobate to repent, but genuinely plans for them not to. Could I ask first, what specifically moved you to this position, and secondly, how can it make sense?

Do you have the idea that its not nice for God to both ordain and carry out the destruction of His enemies with full intent of purpose? Do you struggle yourself with how to relate to the unbelieving if there exists no genuine offer to them? Isn't it a harvest of a field sown with tares? Don't we operate from a different perspective than the Almighty, and therefore behaving as His children means we love our enemies because we know not their eventual salvific status, but He behaves differently because He does know, in fact ordains?

Blessings,
Brad

 

[cygnusx1]

Who was Paul speaking to in this letter? This is a little disengenuous, Cyg, You know that this epistle was written to a Church that had been involved in some error. He was not addressing an assembly of unbelievers. When Paul did address believers, there was none of this idea that there was an open offer to every unbeliever, but he said,
Act 17:22 So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious.
Act 17:23 For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.
Act 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,
Act 17:25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.
Act 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,
Act 17:27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,
Act 17:28 for "'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, "'For we are indeed his offspring.'
Act 17:29 Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man.
Act 17:30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent,
Act 17:31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."
Act 17:32 Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, "We will hear you again about this."
Act 17:33 So Paul went out from their midst.
Act 17:34 But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

I'll pass on this for the moment bro.

He spoke of a command. A king commands laws that he knows not all his subjects will obey, and he affixes punishments for that disobedience. God commands obedience of all, knowing not only some will not obey, but exactly who would not obey, and why they would not obey; because He ordained from before the foundations of the world that they would be vessels of dishonour, to show forth His wrath. Most mocked, some believed and joined Paul. And all that was foreordained by God. It would portray God Himself as "double-minded" to say that there was a "genuine" offer made at Mars Hill. I think your position leads to double-mindedness.

not at all bro , all I can do at the moment is give you a hint , remember our little chat about Election through Christian families and the idea of means being employed , you suggested it was through the means of disobedient parents that children of believers can be reprobates ...... well just take THAT arguement and make a wider application.

But I'm curious, Cyg. You say you used to be some kind of hard-shell hyper-calvinist or something,

I was never a Hyper Calvinist (I was too well read in Spurgeon and Pink for that) but I was certainly a "High Calvinist" , yes.

incidentally , I was helped by many Calvinists , one day I may make a list of those I found most helpful.

and because of that believed that the Gospel was only intended for the elect.

yes , I understood that God was only interested in the elect and was keen to get on damning everyone else.

I may have that wrong, but in any event you say you hold to this idea that God genuinely desires the reprobate to repent, but genuinely plans for them not to.

Sure !

The puritans also spent many hours going through this dichotomy.

Could I ask first, what specifically moved you to this position, and secondly, how can it make sense?

I began to realise certain methods of interpretation were riding rough-shod over scripture , and God's multi-fold expressions of love mercy , longsuffering and even weeping over sinners , many of whom were not elect/saved.
Take Jesus , the full mainifestation of the Father , weeping over Jerusalem , and no I don't buy the idea that this was tears of rage , we have seen Christ angry at the temple and tears were absent. Few wish to say that Christ weeping over Jersualem and her coming destruction is anything to do with God the Father ... I think that position is impossible seeing as Jesus is God and He is the full manifestation of God.

Do you have the idea that its not nice for God to both ordain and carry out the destruction of His enemies with full intent of purpose?

Not particularly , I don't start with what is nice or not nice , I observe what God is like , what His character is like , and draw conclusions accordingly , and any sense of meanness in God is in my mind out of the question.

Do you struggle yourself with how to relate to the unbelieving if there exists no genuine offer to them?

Not anymore , but yes before , when I was a High Calvinist , I believed some of those who heard the Gospel , God didn't even want to save , so any ernest I had , I felt was at odds with God's will REVEALED , and that praying for sinners without knowing if they are elect or not also became a dilema , seeing as we are supposed to pray in the Spirit , ie, for what God desires , not simply what we desire.

Isn't it a harvest of a field sown with tares?

yes , by the enemy.

Don't we operate from a different perspective than the Almighty,

well that is the rub as far as I am concerned , I don't think Christians are called to anything less than becoming more and more Christ-like and working in the same persepctive , ( love ) , as God. I really have little time for any position that wishes to seperate Christians from God.

Loving sinners , loving our enemies is impossible in the flesh , so I expect God to be right at the heart of any love , patience , kindness , compassion and beseeching that we have for sinners , I think if our experience of these doesn't have God at the centre , then it fails , and I look for God in the difficult walk of loving , especially enemies.
If some think that they can do it without God then let them carry on , if some think they can do it with God's help and Grace , even though they believe God is against most humans , then let them carry that through , it is something I personally found soul destroying and a contradiction.

and therefore behaving as His children means we love our enemies because we know not their eventual salvific status, but He behaves differently because He does know, in fact ordains?

I don't think it makes a bit of difference that we don't know and God does know , after all , we don't send ourselves out , and we don't love with a human mentality ... i love sinners in general because God does , I call sinners to repent , because God does , I wish for sinners to be saved because that is something God placed in my heart , God's ordaining sinners for destruction is a just measure , if they are destined to destruction (surely many are) then it is equally clear that it is because they refused the truth.

hope that clarifies a few points...... as I said , I have been where many High Calvinists are , and by God's grace I discovered a larger understanding of God's love , so I pray that you also in the words of the Apostle Paul ,


Ephesians 3 :

18 may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
20 Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

 

[bradfordl]

Cyg,
Sounds like an internal struggle. There is obviously a difference from our perspective, and always will be. We are made to conform to the image of Christ, but we will never BE Christ, and we will never be sovereign God. So in certain things even when we operate in a Christ-like manner, it is from our limited human perspective. We don't walk through closed doors, don't know the thoughts of those around us do we? We don't have transfigurations and such, do we?

Seeing that there are differences, would it not make sense that God would have us to behave as He would if He were living under the same limitations, since we can't live as He does, i.e.; without them? So then we are to love our enemies since we can't know whether someday they may come to repentence, which is holiness from where we sit. But God knows their end.

I don't walk around scowling at unbelievers. I know that the thing that separates me from them has nothing to do with me, but is a work of my Redeemer. And I don't know that they may not recieve the same from Him someday. So I pray for them from my present estate, a little lower than the angels, I show them the kindness that glorifies my Lord, and when opportunity arises, I try to give an "answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:", although I know I don't do it as well as I ought. I don't understand where scripture requires us to see God in dichotomous terms.

One more thing. You said:

not at all bro , all I can do at the moment is give you a hint , remember our little chat about Election through Christian families and the idea of means being employed , you suggested it was through the means of disobedient parents that children of believers can be reprobates ...... well just take THAT arguement and make a wider application.

As I recall, you differed with that position. Do you now claim to agree, and to carry it further out from the covenant family to all humanity? Just curious.

Blessings,

Brad

 

[cygnusx1]

Cyg,
Sounds like an internal struggle. There is obviously a difference from our perspective, and always will be. We are made to conform to the image of Christ, but we will never BE Christ, and we will never be sovereign God. So in certain things even when we operate in a Christ-like manner, it is from our limited human perspective. We don't walk through closed doors, don't know the thoughts of those around us do we? We don't have transfigurations and such, do we?

I am speaking of character not power brad , I don't see any place where our characters in the NEW man are to be any different than God's character , for the New Creation is created and maintained from God the Holy Spirit in the image of God.

Seeing that there are differences,

Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect .

would it not make sense that God would have us to behave as He would if He were living under the same limitations, since we can't live as He does, i.e.; without them? So then we are to love our enemies since we can't know whether someday they may come to repentence, which is holiness from where we sit. But God knows their end.

read Matthew 5 , we are to be like our Father who loves indiscriminately.

I don't walk around scowling at unbelievers. I know that the thing that separates me from them has nothing to do with me, but is a work of my Redeemer. And I don't know that they may not recieve the same from Him someday. So I pray for them from my present estate, a little lower than the angels, I show them the kindness that glorifies my Lord, and when opportunity arises, I try to give an "answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:", although I know I don't do it as well as I ought. I don't understand where scripture requires us to see God in dichotomous terms.

Here's the thing , you may even , under your premise , desire your Mother and Father even your children saved , while at the same time thinking that God wants them damned , I believe as a Calvinist , this is impossible .

1. All good things come from God , so that must mean your desire for their salvation is not an AUNTONOMOUS desire , deny this and welcome to Arminianism!

2. God works all things together for good for those who love the Lord. Therefore it is God who is influencing your desire to pray for sinners , whoever they are!!!!
Deny this and again welcome to Brad's power of Free-will , for brad is praying or desiring something God has nothing to do with , in fact God is said to be against you!!!

One more thing. You said:
As I recall, you differed with that position. Do you now claim to agree, and to carry it further out from the covenant family to all humanity? Just curious.

Blessings,

Brad

No , but some of those principles , eg, God using means to condemn sinners is scriptural.

 

[cygnusx1]

Does Arminianism Provide a Better Answer?

I thought about this, and then had to conclude no. I was convinced that I had no desire to choose God until God put the desire in me. Arminianism has dead people wanting God. This made no sense to me. Once you are convinced of the spiritual deadness of the unregenerate man, you will be a Calvinist.





http://www.geoffrobinson.net/calvinism/calvinism.html

and High Calvinism has Christians loving sinners and desiring they are saved against God's wishes , they must be loving their enemies and desiring sinners saved autonomously !!!

 

[bradfordl]

Here's the thing , you may even , under your premise , desire your Mother and Father even your children saved , while at the same time thinking that God wants them damned , I believe as a Calvinist , this is impossible .

If I desire for my plane to be on time, I don’t sit thinking it must then be God’s will that it be, nor do I sin because I want that and yet it turns out to be late in God’s will. I operate from a position of temporality, as God has ordained; He does not. So for me to desire the salvation of sinners is not contrary to His will for ME. I am not God, I cannot operate as He does.

1. All good things come from God , so that must mean your desire for their salvation is not an AUNTONOMOUS desire , deny this and welcome to Arminianism!

Not autonomy, Cyg, but temporal perspective. Was it autonomy for Abraham to desire that Isaac not be sacrificed? Must not have been, because it turned out to be God’s desire as well. But then was it autonomy for Abe to desire to obey God and carry out His command? Must not have been, because God honored that desire to obey and called it righteousness. So evidently we are to behave somewhat differently from God in our different estate, and yet it can still be correct, because we don’t know what he knows.

2. God works all things together for good for those who love the Lord. Therefore it is God who is influencing your desire to pray for sinners , whoever they are!!!!
Deny this and again welcome to Brad's power of Free-will , for brad is praying or desiring something God has nothing to do with , in fact God is said to be against you!!!

Who’s denying it? He influences us to do what is right from our perspective. Just as He commanded Abe to sacrifice Isaac when He had no intention of it being physically carried out. He accounted it righteousness that Abe was obedient from his perspective, knowing that God was able to raise him from the dead to complete the promise that through Isaac would his seed become as the number of stars in the sky. Abe did not know that the angel would interrupt him and that God would provide a ram. He intended to do something that God did not intend, and yet God called it righteousness, because it sprang from Abe’s temporal perspective. And God ordained the entire event.

We don’t have to try to be God, nor do we need to try to make Him like us to come to terms with this. He is Almighty and we are His children, specks of dust and worms before the King of all creation. Obviously we are to behave in different ways than He.

Blessings,

Brad

 

[cygnusx1]

What's prevented His performing it? It is not His sole desire, nor His primary desire, nor His greatest desire, nor His best desire.

I guess I'd have to say in addition here, we like to think of God as "that saving Being", that He's kind of in the business of saving people. That's because this need is uppermost and of such obsessive importance in out minds. But that's not God's sole reason for being. And thinking that 's so, promotes human soteriology above all else in theology, and makes us question why His salvation can't be better, more expansive, or more thorough. Why aren't all saved? Why isn't everyone impacted by the Holy Spirit in repentant purity? Why are we still sinful creatures?

I think it's because of the distinctly ecclesial, communical responses God is also establishing among us. Now of course, this is not agreed-on by every Reformed believer. But every Reformed believer does have to content with God's preference that "the wicked turn to Him and live", that He wanted to gather a Jerusalem that would not be gathered, and that He will judge people on the basis of His rightful desire that all should rightly turn to Him in repentance.

It's quite clear that God does things He is not otherwise desirous of doing -- because of greater desires. Jesus' prayer in the Garden reflects this: "if there is any other way, let this cup pass from me". Was it Jesus' desire to undergo capital punishment as a criminal? Sorry, it wasn't. It was Jesus' desire for something greater that pressed on Jesus' will to endure (not desire) the Cross for us.

There are a number of possible responses. His Justice. His deserved Glory. His Righteousness. His sharing of Himself with us.

Amen mikey!!!!!

 

[UMP]

I began to realise certain methods of interpretation were riding rough-shod over scripture , and God's multi-fold expressions of love mercy , longsuffering and even weeping over sinners , many of whom were not elect/saved.

Cygnusx1,
I've been thinking on this, God loving those whom he also says He hates. God earnestly desiring men to repent whom He also knows will never repent.
This morning I woke up thinking on something very interesting. God is absolute. Therefore it should be a logical (please excuse the use of that word conclusion that His attributes are absolute. God is love, God is also a God of perfect wrath. I say perfect because anything coming from God IS perfect, hence God is perfect in His wrath as well. Now, since God is perfect and absolute in these attribrutes, we can say that God must be, AT THE SAME TIME, absolutely loving and absolutely wrathful, perfectly so.
Therefore, He must love the reprobate as well as hate them, justly I might add. He would hate the elect as well if not for the work of Jesus Christ on whom He poured out an eternal portion of absolute perfect wrath.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that God's hate of the wicked and his desire for them to repent can be reconciled in the mind of man, to a degree of course.
The only part I cannot put together is what happens with God's love for those who are physically in eternal hell.

 

[cygnusx1]

Cygnusx1,
I've been thinking on this, God loving those whom he also says He hates. God earnestly desiring men to repent whom He also knows will never repent.
This morning I woke up thinking on something very interesting. God is absolute. Therefore it should be a logical (please excuse the use of that word conclusion that His attributes are absolute. God is love, God is also a God of perfect wrath. I say perfect because anything coming from God IS perfect, hence God is perfect in His wrath as well. Now, since God is perfect and absolute in these attribrutes, we can say that God must be, AT THE SAME TIME, absolutely loving and absolutely wrathful, perfectly so.
Therefore, He must love the reprobate as well as hate them, justly I might add. He would hate the elect as well if not for the work of Jesus Christ on whom He poured out an eternal portion of absolute perfect wrath.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that God's hate of the wicked and his desire for them to repent can be reconciled in the mind of man, to a degree of course.
The only part I cannot put together is what happens with God's love for those who are physically in eternal hell.

Good post UMP , and the best is that you actually are deeply considering these things not merely clinging to simplistic constructs.

I think God has been defined love for us , 1 Corinthians 13 , and love is not defined as "election" or "saved" it has a much wider application and where God grants mercies there is a demonstration of love that according to Romans 2 leads (or is meant to lead) sinners to repentance .

Now is hell a place of "temporal mercies" , is it a place of longsuffering , kindness and compassion , or is it a place that is defined by a removal of all of those ?

I think love as defined by longsuffering kindness patience and mercy are the definition of none-hell , so hell is a place where these graces are absent.


All reprobates while on earth are subject to God's temporal mercies , ie, God's love , only the elect are granted FREE , unconditional love . "I will love them freely" Hosea 14:14

Greetings cyg

 

[UMP]

Good post UMP , and the best is that you actually are deeply considering these things not merely clinging to simplistic constructs.

I think God has been defined love for us , 1 Corinthians 13 , and love is not defined as "election" or "saved" it has a much wider application and where God grants mercies there is a demonstration of love that according to Romans 2 leads (or is meant to lead) sinners to repentance .

Now is hell a place of "temporal mercies" , is it a place of longsuffering , kindness and compassion , or is it a place that is defined by a removal of all of those ?

I think love as defined by longsuffering kindness patience and mercy are the definition of none-hell , so hell is a place where these graces are absent.


All reprobates while on earth are subject to God's temporal mercies , ie, God's love , only the elect are granted FREE , unconditional love . "I will love them freely" Hosea 14:14

Greetings cyg

Yes,
But how can God remove something from Himself which is absolute. In other words, if God currenlty loves the reprobate (in some way), how can He stop doing so?
That is what I cannot grasp.

 

[bradfordl]

Yes,
But how can God remove something from Himself which is absolute. In other words, if God currenlty loves the reprobate (in some way), how can He stop doing so?
That is what I cannot grasp.

Especially in light of this:

Son 8:7 Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it: if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be contemned.

 

[cygnusx1]

Yes,
But how can God remove something from Himself which is absolute. In other words, if God currenlty loves the reprobate (in some way), how can He stop doing so?
That is what I cannot grasp.

God is not removing something "from himself" He is removing it from sinners ..... there is no discrepancy.

If God can remove His wrath from sinners , then God can and does remove His love from sinners , deny this and you either disagree with God's definition of Love (1 Corinthians 13) or you must maintain sinners are in no worse , and no better a situation on earth than they are in hell.


Hosea 9:15, "All their evil is at Gilgal; indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels."

 

[TheCosmicGospel]

It starts with the tree in the garden. Why did God make it in the first place? Isn't this where all our troubles began? Didn't God know what He was doing?

The short answer is to give Adam and Eve the opportunity of being faithful and growing in faith. This meant that they had the opportunity to resist the God by being disobedient in the use of God's creation. So if they did not resist God they resisted His means of grace by choosing the fruit from the forbidden tree.

Rest of mankind fell into sin. God is still sovereign. Amen. But man continued to resist God by misusing God's creation, the means of God's grace. So He eventually sent the flood.

So how does the garden, the tree, and the flood fit in with irresistable grace?

Peace and Joy,
Cosmic

We are here to serve God, not solve God - Cosmic

 

[UMP]

If God can remove His wrath from sinners , then God can and does remove His love from sinners , ....

Yes, but His wrath was not really removed in the sense that is disappeared into nothingness. It was specifically placed on Christ, who paid an ETERNAL price with His suffering and death. There was a payment of equal value made, there was something on the "other side of the scale"

Where does God's "love" for the reprobate go while these people are in eternal hell. What is on the other side of the scale?

 

[cygnusx1]

JOHN CALVIN.

"Hence he says, I loved you. God might indeed have made an appeal to the Jews on another ground; for had he not manifested his love to them, they were yet bound to submit to his authority. He does not indeed speak here of God’s love generally, such as he shows to the whole human race; but he condemns the Jews, inasmuch as having been freely adopted by God as his holy and peculiar people, they yet forgot this honor, and despised the Giver, and regarded what he taught them as nothing. When therefore God says that he loved the Jews, we see that his object was to convict them of ingratitude for having despised the singular favor bestowed on them alone, rather than to press that authority which he possesses over all mankind in common." Calvin Commentary on Mal 1:2.


"The Father loveth the Son. But what is the meaning of this reason? Does he regard all others with hatred? The answer is easy, that he does not speak of the common love with which God regards men whom he has created, or his other works, but of that peculiar love which, beginning with the Son, flows from him to all the creatures. For that love with which, embracing the Son, he embraces us also in him, leads him to communicate all his benefits to us by his hand." Calvin Commentary on John 3:35.

"The meaning of Moses is then easy enough, namely that albeit God loves all people, yet that his Saints are in his charge or protection, yea even those whom he has chosen. Unless a man will refer these words, "the People", to the twelve tribes: but that were hard and constrained. Moses then does here compare all men and all the Nations of the earth with the lineage of Abraham which God had chosen: as if he should say, that God's grace is spread out everywhere, as we ourselves see, and as the Scripture also witnesses in other places. And not only men are partakers of this goodness of God, and are fed and maintained by his liberality: but he does also show himself bountiful even to to brute beasts. Even thither does his mercy extend according to this saying of the Psalm, Who makes the fields and mountains to bring forth grass for the feeding of cattle, but God who has a care of them? Seeing that GOD vouchsafes to have so merciful regard of the beasts which he has created, as to given them food; it is more to be thought that he will be a foster father to men, whom he has made and shaped after his own image, which approaches nearer unto him, and which have a thing far excelling above all other creatures: God then does love all people. Yea, but yet not in comparison to his Church. And why? For all the children of Adam are enemies unto God by reason of the corruption that is in them. True it is that God loves them as his creatures: but yet he must needs hate them, because they be perverted and given to all evil. And that is the cause why the Scripture tells us that God repented him that ever he made man, considering that he is so marred. And in th same respect also is it said, that we be banished out of God's kingdom, that we be his enemies, that he shakes us off and disclaims us, that he abhors us, that we be the children of wrath, and that we be so corrupted, as there remains nothing but utter confusion upon our heads. When the Scripture speaks so, it is to show us that although God for his part be favorable and merciful to us, for so much as we be his creatures: yet notwithstanding we deserve well to be disclaimed and hated at his hand, and that he should not vouchsafe to have a care of us. Now then, whereas God loves us, let us understand that he overcomes our naughtiness with his goodness, which is infinite. Albeit, as I have touched already, his loving other men is nothing in comparison to those whom he has chosen and whom he acknowledges for his children. Now then, does he love all people? Yet we are his hand: that is to say, he will show that we be far nearer to him, and that he has much more familiar acquaintance with us beyond all comparison, than he has with all the rest of the world. For he has called us unto his house, he dwells among us, he will be known to be our Father, he will have us to call upon him with full trust and liberty, so as we need not to doubt but that his power is spread out to defend us. Lo how Moses meant to magnify God's goodness in this place, after the manner that he has made himself to be felt in his Church and to his Flock…
We see how brute beasts are sustained by his hand: and therein we ought to consider what his goodness is. Again, as touching the wicked which despise him, and do nothing else but provoke his wrath; when yet for all that, we see the sun shine upon them to give them light, they eat and drink , and they be maintained at God's cost, and by his liberality: let us consider that although men deserve to be utterly forsaken; yet notwithstanding God spares them and bears with them, and overcomes their wickedness with his goodness, in that he roots them not out at the first, but vouchsafes to foster them still, and to show a fatherly care towards them. Calvin Sermons on Deuteronomy, Sermon 91, 33:1-3, p., 1188-9.

 

[bradfordl]

True it is that God loves them as his creatures

Right! And He makes no "genuine offer" of salvation to oxes or otters or obstinate reprobates.

 

[cygnusx1]

Where does God's "love" for the reprobate go while these people are in eternal hell. What is on the other side of the scale?

clearly it is withdrawn .

God has a choice who He loves and if He will maintain His love , God is no more compelled to continue longsuffering kindness and patience , which are all attributes of love , than He is forced to love anyone .

The 'nature' of love ;

Son 8:7 Many waters cannot quench love, neither can the floods drown it: if a man would give all the substance of his house for love, it would utterly be contemned.

does not in any way determine the freedom of God's choice to love , or God's choice to "take away" His love .

Hosea 9:15, "All their evil is at Gilgal; indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels."

*just because the US has the best weaponary in the world , does not imply that it must used it to it's full force .

 

[cygnusx1]

Right! And He makes no "genuine offer" of salvation to oxes or otters or obstinate reprobates.

in your view sinners are to do nothing to obtain salvation so there can be no "opportunities" no "offers" .... nothing but a wait and see mentality .

Originally Posted by bradfordl
Glad you enjoyed it, Cyg, but I'm sure you understand there is nothing you must do to be saved,

in your view there are no genuine offers because there is no interaction between God and sinners ... in your view you just get whatever you get.

but why we are moving over to "Gospel Offers" is a mystery to me ....

God loves all men .


JOHN CALVIN


"True it is that God giveth oftentimes some sign of his love to all men in general: but yet is all Adam's offspring cut off from him, till we be grafted in again by Jesus Christ. Therefore there is one kind of love which God beareth towards all men, for that he hath created them after his own image, in which respect he maketh the Sun to shine upon all men, nourishing them and having a care of their life. But all this is nothing, in respect of the special goodness which he keepeth in store for his chosen, and for those that are of his flock: howbeit not for any worthiness which he findeth in them, but for because it pleaseth him to accept them for his own." From Calvin's Sermons on Galatians, Sermon Two, 1:3-5.

 

[bradfordl]

in your view sinners are to do nothing to obtain salvation so there can be no "opportunities" no "offers" .... nothing but a wait and see mentality .

if you want to portray it in those terms, so be it unto you. But of course it is essentially true. Salvation comes to the elect in God's timing through His means. Jacob was chosen over Esau before birth, but had to wait to receive the blessing at Isaac's deathbed.

Hosea 9:15, "All their evil is at Gilgal; indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels."

Is this a change of God's plan, or the declaration of an ordained event within it?

clearly it is withdrawn

You are equating God's love for all creatures with His special love for His elect. Calvin makes a huge distinction between the two in the quote you posted. The care He shows to oxes and otters and obstinate reprobates is never equivalent in any way to that given His own. If you equate them, then you hold to an open theism; God changes His mind at the moment of their death, withdraws that love, and casts them into outer darkness. That is not the God of the Bible.

We care for our livestock in that we prevent their unnecessary suffering, provide for their sustenance, bind up their wounds, & etc., but on the day of the feast, we slaughter the fatted calf and have a party. You may call that kindness love of a type, but we know from the start that someday we will eat the animal. That is not "withdrawing" love, that is carrying out our original intent. The love we show our children is of a different type and character altogether. The same is true of God.

Blessings,

Brad

 

[cygnusx1]

if you want to portray it in those terms, so be it unto you. But of course it is essentially true. Salvation comes to the elect in God's timing through His means. Jacob was chosen over Esau before birth, but had to wait to receive the blessing at Isaac's deathbed.

it really isn't a question of me wanting to portray it in those terms , we have debated this before and your arguement is sinners are to do nothing , for as soon as you agree that sinners are to do something in order to be saved , you open the door for interaction between God and man .

Is this a change of God's plan, or the declaration of an ordained event within it?

no , whatever gave you that idea ?

You are equating God's love for all creatures with His special love for His elect.

I am ? , where ?


where does cygnus say God has the same , identical love for all sinners ?

no , you are falsifying my beliefs bro.

I agree with John Calvin.

Calvin makes a huge distinction between the two in the quote you posted. The care He shows to oxes and otters and obstinate reprobates is never equivalent in any way to that given His own. If you equate them, then you hold to an open theism; God changes His mind at the moment of their death, withdraws that love, and casts them into outer darkness. That is not the God of the Bible.

you are busy burning straw bro ........

We care for our livestock in that we prevent their unnecessary suffering, provide for their sustenance, bind up their wounds, & etc., but on the day of the feast, we slaughter the fatted calf and have a party. You may call that kindness love of a type, but we know from the start that someday we will eat the animal. That is not "withdrawing" love, that is carrying out our original intent. The love we show our children is of a different type and character altogether. The same is true of God.

Blessings,

Brad

Clearly Calvin holds that God does love all mankind , which you deny , and that God's love for the elect is a special love , which logically you also must reject , for to you there is no special love , only love , and only for the elect .

I agree with Calvin and you disagree with both of us , your view is the same as Gill and Pink.


John Calvin


"So let us learn (following what I have already mentioned) to know in everything and by everything the inestimable goodness of our God. For as He declared His love toward mankind when He spared not His Only Son but delivered Him to death for sinners, also He declares a love which He bears especially toward us when by His Holy Spirit He touches us by the knowledge of our sins and He makes us wail and draws us to Himself with repentance." Sermons on the Deity of Christ, Sermon 6: The Fourth Sermon on the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, p 108. (Old Paths Publ.,)