Weep Over Jerusalem?

[AndOne]

How can RF agree? Please explain.

Well not to necessarily speak for Hamm - but there is a difference between free will and freewill...

 

[Hammster]

It would be the apotheosis of incongruity for God to gracefully send His Son to die on the cross to propitiate for sin if He only made that act available for some.
I cannot understand how you can even ask the question.

What is going on Hammster????

Avoiding the question. Since He took the wrath of God from all sinners (as you've stated here), has He also ensured that every single person who has ever lived has had equal opportunity to hear and understand the gospel?

 

[Hammster]

How can RF agree? Please explain.

What is RF?

I don't understand your concern.

 

[janxharris]

Avoiding the question. Since He took the wrath of God from all sinners (as you've stated here), has He also ensured that every single person who has ever lived has had equal opportunity to hear and understand the gospel?

If not all get a fair chance then God would seem unjust. As for how - I don't know.

RF should have been RT. Apologies.

Satan was allowed to have power over Job since he (Satan) had scoffed that Job only feared God because of what God had given him (Job). The test was to see if Job continued to fear and trust God whilst he suffered physically and materially. Job remained faithful to God throughout.

Only free will permits such a test as this.

I don't understand how you can agree with this. Was there anything of Job himself that was able to maintain his faith? Or was it all God? If the outcome was preordained, how it it a test?

 

[Hammster]

If not all get a fair chance then God would seem unjust. As for how - I don't know.

RF should have been RT. Apologies.

Satan was allowed to have power over Job since he (Satan) had scoffed that Job only feared God because of what God had given him (Job). The test was to see if Job continued to fear and trust God whilst he suffered physically and materially. Job remained faithful to God throughout.

Only free will permits such a test as this.

I don't understand how you can agree with this. Was there anything of Job himself that was able to maintain his faith? Or was it all God? If the outcome was preordained, how it it a test?

Job was able to maintain his faith in the same way we are. And if it wasn't preordained, then how much control does God really have. Was the book about how great Job was, or how good God is?

And it was a rest in the same way that Christ's temptation was a test. That is unless you think Christ could have failed. A preordained outcome does not negate the validity of a test.

 

[crimsonleaf]

Thanks for your answer. I can see that what I have asked is difficult to answer from what you have said. However, I'll try again but this time in the light of some other scriptures:

Matthew 11:21
Not everyone who says, 'Lord, Lord', will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those that do the will of my Father who is in heaven.

Heberews 3:12-14
See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end.

2 Peter 3:20-21
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

So, since it is possible to lose ones faith, or, if not, it is possible that we were not true believers in the first place:

Are you okay with the possibility that God may have withheld mercy from you?

If you're saying that I may only think I'm saved, where really I might not be, I reject the proposition. Those who believe in Christ are saved, full stop. Those who temporarily think they're believers, or who con themselves into believing so, are not. The proof of my belief is and will be in my actions.

Do I believe my faith is temporary? No, insofar as the pain I feel when people say that God relies on man, or when Catholics tell me that God is "obedient" to them, is practically tangible. My love and understanding grow daily. My Christian walk becomes more direct.

However, if you reject my answer, and believe that one day I may declare God my enemy (having never really known Him) then I'll be fine if you tell me I'm going to hell, because, as I pointed out earlier, I just won't care.

God chooses janx. I am blessed that he chose me, and you should be as happy that He chose you.

 

[guuila]

If not all get a fair chance then God would seem unjust. As for how - I don't know.

There you go again. All men deserve condemnation, yet if God doesn't offer salvation to every single person, He is unjust. How can a person deserve eternal suffering and at the same time deserve a "chance" at eternal happiness and joy in heaven?

 

[guuila]

Looks like you overlooked this one Janx so I'll post it again:

I do not accept that it true of my theology.

Every single person that is born has an equal chance to come to Christ.

If God looks into the future and sees they won't believe, and then creates them anyway, you think they still have a "chance" at heaven?

 

[guuila]

God would never only try to save some. He has made salvation available for all.

I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:14-15 ESV)

John 10:9
I am the gate; anyone who enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out and find pasture.

Yep. Great verse. Anyone who comes to Christ will be saved.

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Can you tell us what propitiation means? That's actually the proper translation: He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2 ESV)

John 1:9
The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world.

What does this mean exactly? It seems you're confusing concepts. This isn't talking about the atonement.

You don't make a supreme sacrifice on a cross only to caveat it with, '...actually, I only did it for some'. Such would be incongruous: on the one hand the ultimate act of sacrifice and grace and on the other, partiality of the grossest kind.

Why do you feel that you have the right to tell God what is acceptable and what isn't when it comes to atoning for sin?

 

[janxharris]

If you're saying that I may only think I'm saved, where really I might not be, I reject the proposition. Those who believe in Christ are saved, full stop. Those who temporarily think they're believers, or who con themselves into believing so, are not. The proof of my belief is and will be in my actions.

Do I believe my faith is temporary? No, insofar as the pain I feel when people say that God relies on man, or when Catholics tell me that God is "obedient" to them, is practically tangible. My love and understanding grow daily. My Christian walk becomes more direct.

However, if you reject my answer, and believe that one day I may declare God my enemy (having never really known Him) then I'll be fine if you tell me I'm going to hell, because, as I pointed out earlier, I just won't care.

God chooses janx. I am blessed that he chose me, and you should be as happy that He chose you.

Thank you for your answer.

However, I reject utterly, and would consider God most monstrous, if He gave me passage to heaven whilst another was denied it because He had arbitrarily decided to do so without any reference to our response to Him.

Such a scenario is inconceivable. The Passion of Christ and Reformed Theology's unscriptural unconditional election are mutually exclusive. One is the supremest sacrifice ever known, the other treats of an arbitrary, whimsical God.

Please tell me, then, is it that you expect God to explain this mystery of His election (as RT defines it) at some point in the future? Is it the case that you (and perhaps all Reformers) are desperate to find out? That you fully expect the explanation to completely vindicate God?

Would you be happy if God never offered any explanation...ever?

Do you admit that your theology, at least prima facie, makes God seem like a tyrant of the worst kind?

 

[janxharris]

There you go again. All men deserve condemnation, yet if God doesn't offer salvation to every single person, He is unjust. How can a person deserve eternal suffering and at the same time deserve a "chance" at eternal happiness and joy in heaven?

God, having decided to have mercy, in spite of our rebellion, would not pick and choose without good reason.

You have never provided an explanation that would vindicate such apparent arbitrariness.

 

[Hammster]

God, having decided to have mercy, in spite of our rebellion, would not pick and choose without good reason.

You have never provided an explanation that would vindicate such apparent arbitrariness.

I have found that "the purpose of His will" to be satisfactory. Maybe not emotionally. But like Job, sometimes I have to take what's given.

 

[cygnusx1]

God, having decided to have mercy, in spite of our rebellion, would not pick and choose without good reason.

You have never provided an explanation that would vindicate such apparent arbitrariness.

The reason is given in 1 Corinthians , a reason that could not be given in a synergistic view !

1 Cor 1 :

[23] But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
[24] But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
[25] Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
[26] For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
[27] But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
[28] And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
[29] That no flesh should glory in his presence.

 

[guuila]

God, having decided to have mercy, in spite of our rebellion, would not pick and choose without good reason.

Amen!

You have never provided an explanation that would vindicate such apparent arbitrariness.

In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. (Ephesians 1:5-6 ESV)

In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:11-12 ESV)

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began... (2 Timothy 1:8-9 ESV)

It's sad that those reasons are 'arbitrary' to you. It's sad that you're effectively shaking your fists at God saying "The purpose of your will isn't good enough because it doesn't pass the requirement that I must understand and approve of what you're doing. Therefore I will call your reasoning arbitrary and demand that the reason must be because of something I did!"

Friend, you sound just like the person Paul rebuked in Romans 9:

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— (Romans 9:19-23 ESV)

The fact that this doesn't concern you is amazing to me.

 

[crimsonleaf]

Thank you for your answer.

However, I reject utterly, and would consider God most monstrous, if He gave me passage to heaven whilst another was denied it because He had arbitrarily decided to do so without any reference to our response to Him.

Such a scenario is inconceivable.

No it isn't. It has been conceived of.

The Passion of Christ and Reformed Theology's unscriptural unconditional election are mutually exclusive.

No they're not.

One is the supremest sacrifice ever known, the other treats of an arbitrary, whimsical God.

Who says God's decisions are arbitrary or whimsical? You?

Please tell me, then, is it that you expect God to explain this mystery of His election (as RT defines it) at some point in the future? Is it the case that you (and perhaps all Reformers) are desperate to find out? That you fully expect the explanation to completely vindicate God?

Unlike you, I don't expect God to account to me for anything. I suspect that the fact that you believe that God owes you an explanation and I don't is the central pillar of our differences. On your second point, I hope I speak for Reformers generally when I say that we are not looking forward to knowing why God chooses those He chooses specifically. Why would I even ask the question? Whatever God's reason it's absolutely fine with me. And God doesn't need vindicating. I can't believe this attitude that He's somehow beholden to us. Bizarre.

Would you be happy if God never offered any explanation...ever?

I'd be thrilled skinny if I was never told, and I don't expect to ever know.

Do you admit that your theology, at least prima facie, makes God seem like a tyrant of the worst kind?

Not remotely. Do you admit that under your theology the number of people God saves is entirely down to man's individual choice and outside of God's control?

 

[travelah]

Why would Jesus weep at all for any reason?

 

[guuila]

Why would Jesus weep at all for any reason?

Why would Jesus say “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me"?

 

[janxharris]

I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. (John 10:14-15 ESV)

Jesus attempts, urges and makes a case for belief in Him to those that are not his sheep in verses 34-48 of that Chapter.

 

[janxharris]

In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. (Ephesians 1:5-6 ESV)

In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:11-12 ESV)

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began... (2 Timothy 1:8-9 ESV)

It's sad that those reasons are 'arbitrary' to you. It's sad that you're effectively shaking your fists at God saying "The purpose of your will isn't good enough because it doesn't pass the requirement that I must understand and approve of what you're doing. Therefore I will call your reasoning arbitrary and demand that the reason must be because of something I did!"


Friend, you sound just like the person Paul rebuked in Romans 9:

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— (Romans 9:19-23 ESV)

The fact that this doesn't concern you is amazing to me.

griff, your argument stands only if the verses you sight have been correctly understood by your theology. You think they are saying that God chose whom He would save (unconditionally) and did so 'according to the purpose of His will and to the praise of his glorious grace.'

I think, rather, that they say that sending Jesus Christ was that which was 'according to the purpose of His will and to the praise of His glorious grace'. It was Jesus that was predestined.

In love he predestined us (believers) for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.

The Timothy verses are similar: We aren't saved because of our works but because of Jesus Christ who is God's 'purpose and grace' whom 'he gave us...before the ages began...'

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began... (2 Timothy 1:8-9 ESV)

In Romans 9 Paul explains that God's election of the nation of Israel was on His terms and without reference to anything good or bad that any individual might do. Paul explains that God now works through the Gentile nations because, in general, the Jews had sought righteousness through works. This situation is, as Paul outlines in Romans 11, temporary.

Romans 11:25,26
'For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.'

Romans 9 does not speak of individual election.

 

[janxharris]

No it isn't. It has been conceived of.

No they're not.

Who says God's decisions are arbitrary or whimsical? You?

Unlike you, I don't expect God to account to me for anything. I suspect that the fact that you believe that God owes you an explanation and I don't is the central pillar of our differences. On your second point, I hope I speak for Reformers generally when I say that we are not looking forward to knowing why God chooses those He chooses specifically. Why would I even ask the question? Whatever God's reason it's absolutely fine with me. And God doesn't need vindicating. I can't believe this attitude that He's somehow beholden to us. Bizarre.

I'd be thrilled skinny if I was never told, and I don't expect to ever know.

Not remotely. Do you admit that under your theology the number of people God saves is entirely down to man's individual choice and outside of God's control?

God would not force or make His grace irresistible.

I am perplexed by your answers crimsonleaf. I find it difficult to understand why you don't wish for an explanation for such a troubling doctrine.

What is your understanding of Matthew 23:39? I ask because it would seem that Jesus' second coming is conditional. (By the way, I am not suggesting that there is a possibility that Jesus wont come because the condition might not be met.)

For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord