Questions for Synergists

[Skala]

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?

 

[guuila]

 

[crimsonleaf]

Subscribing for educational reasons. ..

 

[jdbear]

skala said,
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:

They're not all true. You seem to believe God is doing everything He can to keep some people from going to hell and some people from the Kingdom. The Bible doesn't teach this. The Bible shows God did everything He needed to allow people into His Kingdom.

 

[Catholic Dude]

1) 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?

Romans 10 21 But of Israel, God says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”
​

God's over-arching plan (Providence) allows people to disobey Him and suffer the consequences. As a crude analogy, a parent doesn't want their child to end up in jail, but the child can leave the house and turn to crime.

2) Why do some people die earlier than others? Is that fair? Why didn't God give those two people an equal opportunity?

Equal opportunity is not the same as sufficient opportunity. There's no reason why one must think "equal opportunity."

Also, Providence knows that sometimes it's better to have people live less longer or suffer more than others.

Wisdom 4: 10 There were some who pleased God and were loved by him, and while living among sinners were taken up.
11 They were caught up so that evil might not change their understanding or guile deceive their souls.
​

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?

You're acting as if it's either 100% God or 100% man. So called synergists don't view this as if God is playing pinball and trying oh so hard to keep the ball out of the pit but is powerless to do anything about it.

1 Cor 9: 22 To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings. 24 Do you not know that in a race the runners all compete, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win it. 25 Athletes exercise self-control in all things; they do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable one. 26 So I do not run aimlessly, nor do I box as though beating the air; 27 but I punish my body and enslave it, so that after proclaiming to others I myself should not be disqualified.
​

God has kept many saved people alive for the purpose of (a) increasing their sanctification, and (b) to use them as instruments to help save and sanctify others. If everyone dropped dead as soon as they believed, there would be no preachers.

4) Speaking of fairness, if God desperately wishes everyone would be saved, why does He allow such diverse situations in the human race?

Fairness isn't the issue. Many factors determine why there are 'imbalances' you describe.

Lk 12: 47 That slave who knew what his master wanted, but did not prepare himself or do what was wanted, will receive a severe beating. 48 But the one who did not know and did what deserved a beating will receive a light beating. From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded.
​

Just having the Gospel means nothing, for often this translates into worse wrath from God because those who should have known better will receive a worse beating.

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.

This shows the "fairness" thesis is flawed, since Angels were subject to a different trial on different conditions. They didn't endure original sin; they each were without sin when they made their original decision.

 

[Skala]

They're not all true. You seem to believe God is doing everything He can to keep some people from going to hell and some people from the Kingdom. The Bible doesn't teach this. The Bible shows God did everything He needed to allow people into His Kingdom.

Actually, I don't believe God is positively doing anything to "keep some people from the Kingdom".

I also disagree with your assertion that God did everything he needed to allow people into his kingdom. But rather, God did everything to ensure that His people enter the kingdom.

But these are not answers to the OP.

 

[janxharris]

Actually, I don't believe God is positively doing anything to "keep some people from the Kingdom".

If regeneration is the sine qua non of salvation then God is withholding it under your theology. Don't forget, you have told us Arminians that we can't pull ourselves up by our boot-straps; which, in effect, is saying that we need regeneration.

You can't have it both ways.

I also disagree with your assertion that God did everything he needed to allow people into his kingdom. But rather, God did everything to ensure that His people enter the kingdom.

His people are those that put their faith in Him, not those God supposedly chose beforehand.

Okay, apologies, I should really deal with the OP...

 

[jdbear]

skala said,
Actually, I don't believe God is positively doing anything to "keep some people from the Kingdom".

To see those who desperately need help and do nothing would be a negative. It's sin also.

skala said, I also disagree with your assertion that God did everything he needed to allow people into his kingdom. But rather, God did everything to ensure that His people enter the kingdom.

Well, since Jesus tells us to be like the Father, maybe we should use the no obligation clause too.

 

[janxharris]

To see those who desperately need help and do nothing would be a negative. It's sin also.
Well, since Jesus tells us to be like the Father, maybe we should use the no obligation clause too.

exactly.

 

[janxharris]

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?

I think you choose not to recognise the critical importance of free will in God's creation. Without it there would be very little of worth. Ensuring that nobody would ultimately reject God would mean monkeying with human free will.

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?

To willingly believe, in the true sense of the word, it is necessary that unbelief is an option.

That way, he'd have an entire human race of willing believers, and nobody in hell.

Rather, you would have an entire race of robots.

 

[Nanopants]

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

-God is doing everything He can to keep people out of hell

I'd much rather say He is just in all He does, but your other assumptions look fine.

-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.

I wouldn't agree with you on your usage of foreknowledge here. Here's the thing: God created trees. Trees drop seeds to propagate their kind. Not every seed germinates. If God foreknows which seeds would germinate according to your understanding of foreknowledge, why would He create trees to drop seeds according to a pseudo random pattern which optimizes the probability that at least some seeds will germinate? Either He's created reality to play tricks on us or your concept of foreknowledge requires an update.

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.

Lifespan is irrelevant. In preaching the Gospel, we're working out judgment on the earth for a purpose; the same judgment everyone faces regardless of lifespan. Those who believe are those who pass through that judgment (Jhn 5:24).

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?

See my previous response.

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?

My previous response should apply here as well.

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?

It's just. Fallen angels are held captive "in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment" (Jude 1:6). Those who lead into captivity are led into captivity (Rev 13:10).

 

[crimsonleaf]

I think you choose not to recognise the critical importance of free will in God's creation. Without it there would be very little of worth. Ensuring that nobody would ultimately reject God would mean monkeying with human free will.

Not at all. Now you've confessed yourself an Arminian you must admit to having God look down the tunnel of time to see who would believe and elect them. If this is the case, He could look down the tunnel of time, see who would WILLINGLY choose Him, and create only them. Job done. No unbelievers to condemn and free will unimpaired?

To willingly believe, in the true sense of the word, it is necessary that unbelief is an option.

Philosophically incorrect. I can look over the top of a tall building and know without doubt that I would fall if I allowed myself to. I don't have to entertain the idea that I might hover like a hummingbird in order to believe that I might do myself serious harm. So belief in something doesn't need the option of unbelief for it to be valid. (What is it with me and tall buildings?)

Rather, you would have an entire race of robots.

No, you would have an entire race of willing believers. Do you consider Heaven to be populated by robots Jan? Is unbelief an option for the saved in Heaven? Surely if we all, without exception will believe then we're nothing but bland automatons? Belief and unbelief filters out a population fit for the heavenly kingdom - just think, if God brought that process forward a notch and didn't create the unbeliever in the first place we'd have Heaven on Earth now...

 

[motherprayer]

Oh my. Subscribing

 

[janxharris]

Not at all. Now you've confessed yourself an Arminian you must admit to having God look down the tunnel of time to see who would believe and elect them. If this is the case, He could look down the tunnel of time, see who would WILLINGLY choose Him, and create only them. Job done. No unbelievers to condemn and free will unimpaired?

Now that is a fascinating conundrum...

Some thought is need...

 

[crimsonleaf]

Oh my. Subscribing

 

[motherprayer]

LEEEEE MEEEE LOOOOONEE!

I have thoughts. I will be back, when my brain unmushes itself. Right now its morning.

 

[crimsonleaf]

LEEEEE MEEEE LOOOOONEE!

I have thoughts. I will be back, when my brain unmushes itself. Right now its morning.

Ahhhhh, you love us really...

 

[motherprayer]

Ahhhhh, you love us really...

Yes. I truly DO love you! Haha I got slammed in another thread for using the "L" word. They told me I use it like a sword

But I'm all like, um. Didn't Christ say all the commandments HANG on love anyway? We're APOSTA love.

 

[guuila]

Now that is a fascinating conundrum...

Some thought is need...

Do you think you could let us know your conclusion this time? You seem to do this a lot. Then you find a new thread and regurgitate the same ol' anti-Calvinistic rhetoric.

 

[janxharris]

Do you think you could let us know your conclusion this time? You seem to do this a lot. Then you find a new thread and regurgitate the same ol' anti-Calvinistic rhetoric.

I am against Calvinism and you are against Arminianism.

This thread doesn't hinge on whether I answer or not.