Weep Over Jerusalem?

[guuila]

I have never demanded that God extend mercy to his creation. However, to do so with partiality and without good reason for such is without doubt immoral.

So you must ultimately approve of God's reasons in election. Gotcha.

Thankfully, God didn't do so - for he is the propitiation for our sins, and not just ours but the whole world.

Can you tell us what propitiation means?

 

[guuila]

'Elect' is not mentioned in the scriptures I have been discussing.

Cool. Neither is Trinity. I guess that means in these verses Jesus isn't the 2nd person of the Trinity huh? Now can you answer my question?

 

[guuila]

For Janx: http://www.christianforums.com/t7717935-38/#post62700994

 

[guuila]

For Janx: http://www.christianforums.com/t7717935-38/#post62700989

 

[crimsonleaf]

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

Don't be perplexed. It's just that you need God to account to you and I don't. I thought I'd made that clear. Throughout this conversation and others you seem very clear that although we deserve utter condemnation God would only be God if He gave us a chance to get off the hook. It's like today's law saying to EVERY rapist "I know you raped that little girl, but to be fair to you if you say sorry you won't get the chair, you can go home." Is that fair? Who to? Does that show the might and power of our law, or that it is weak and ineffectual? Is our God weak and ineffectual?

God is merciful to some and just with some. Why, we don't and can't know. I'm just grateful I'm on His "good side" for some reason of His deciding.

As for Matt 23:39, I don't see it as conditional. The statement by the Jews and Christ's return seem to be concurrent events but it doesn't follow that one is triggered by the other.

 

[travelah]

After all this time you still think Calvinists don't believe in free will. Amazing.

Some do, some don't.

 

[crimsonleaf]

@Janx:

Hi again. As I've answered your questions, do you mind paying me the courtesy of answering mine:

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?

Ta!

 

[guuila]

Throughout this conversation and others you seem very clear that although we deserve utter condemnation God would only be God if He gave us a chance to get off the hook. It's like today's law saying to EVERY rapist "I know you raped that little girl, but to be fair to you if you say sorry you won't get the chair, you can go home." Is that fair? Who to? Does that show the might and power of our law, or that it is weak and ineffectual? Is our God weak and ineffectual?

God is merciful to some and just with some. Why, we don't and can't know. I'm just grateful I'm on His "good side" for some reason of His deciding.

And it seems God was perfectly content on telling us that this is according to the counsel of his will; yet some folks around here who say they've tasted the grace of God in salvation and who supposedly know their own sinfulness and worthiness of eternal hellfire seem to think the reasons God has revealed aren't good enough. They want the reason for their election to be because of something they did instead of because God chose to save them according to his own purpose. Not a place I want to be. Just sayin'.

 

[guuila]

Some do, some don't.

Who doesn't?

 

[guuila]

Hi again. As I've answered your questions, do you mind paying me the courtesy of answering mine:

I suspect the answer will be similar to what I've seen in the past. Something like "God is sooooooooo sovereign he lets us be sovereign!!!" In other words, God is "so sovereign" he steps down off his throne and lets us sit on it without compromising his sovereignty. Utter silliness.

 

[janxharris]

@Janx:

Hi again. As I've answered your questions, do you mind paying me the courtesy of answering mine:



Ta!

Hi.

You:
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?

Yes but it must be understood that God is not surprised by what man does or does not do. He has always known the outcome so it does not mean that He is not in control. It is not as if He needs us to believe but rather that it is his wish that all men should be saved.

 

[guuila]

Hi.

You:
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?

Yes but it must be understood that God is not surprised by what man does or does not do. He has always known the outcome so it does not mean that He is not in control. It is not as if He needs us to believe but rather that it is his wish that all men should be saved.

So if before God makes Bob, God looks into the future and sees that Bob is just too stubborn and won't believe, and then God creates Bob anyway, after Bob is created can he be saved? The fact that you continually ignore questions like this is telling.

 

[travelah]

Who doesn't?

Many. Take a trip over to CARM and start talking about free will. Heck, just look at your compatriots here in any discussion about "free will".

 

[janxharris]

So if before God makes Bob, God looks into the future and sees that Bob is just too stubborn and won't believe, and then God creates Bob anyway, after Bob is created can he be saved? The fact that you continually ignore questions like this is telling.

Since Bob had every chance to believe then no one could ever say that God was cruel in creating him. As I have said before, a world without true free will, where nobody ends up not believing is not what God was about. I think He wanted to see genuine fear, love and trust in Him just as Job maintained despite his suffering.

If it nothing about us as humans then Job was not tested and nor are we.

 

[guuila]

Since Bob had every chance to believe then no one could ever say that God was cruel in creating him. As I have said before, a world without true free will, where nobody ends up not believing is not what God was about. I think He wanted to see genuine fear, love and trust in Him just as Job maintained despite his suffering.

If it nothing about us as humans then Job was not tested and nor are we.

Janx, you are dodging the question and you know it. I didn't ask if Bob had a chance to believe. I'm asking you if after God creates Bob knowing full well that Bob won't believe, can Bob be saved?

 

[guuila]

Many. Take a trip over to CARM and start talking about free will. Heck, just look at your compatriots here in any discussion about "free will".

Huh. Well, I haven't seen anyone in this discussion deny it. How do you define free will? What does free will mean to you?

 

[janxharris]

Yep. We're commanded to repent and believe. Unbelievers become believers. But goats don't become sheep. You're confusing justification with election. And still, you're trying to tell us Jesus died for the goats when he explicitly says that he died for the sheep.



Um ok. Fortunately we don't have to submit to your faulty conclusions. No one seeks after God. - Rom 3:11

There is no mention of goats in John 10.

Regarding Romans 3:10-12
As it is written:“There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

1. What did they turn away from?
2. What were they before they became worthless?

 

[guuila]

There is no mention of goats in John 10.

There's no mention of Trinity either. I guess Jesus isn't the 2nd person of the Trinity in John 10.

Regarding Romans 3:10-12
As it is written:“There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

1. What did they turn away from?
2. What were they before they became worthless?

I'm not answering any more of your questions until you acknowledge mine.

 

[janxharris]

Janx, you are dodging the question and you know it. I didn't ask if Bob had a chance to believe. I'm asking you if after God creates Bob knowing full well that Bob won't believe, can Bob be saved?

Bob wont be saved because Bob wont choose God. Temporally, he had a chance.

One must take into consideration the point I made about how altered the world would be if there was no true free will.

 

[janxharris]

There's no mention of Trinity either. I guess Jesus isn't the 2nd person of the Trinity in John 10.



I'm not answering any more of your questions until you acknowledge mine.

I will try and get round to them - I am rather busy at the moment. I am not ignoring you.