Originally posted by vistesdThere is a distinction between personal and impersonal love. Depsite the cold-sounding nature of 'impersonal,' it is not a negative aspect of love. Impersonal simply relies on the subject, not the object; personal relies on the object.
It’s coming back to me...
B & C combined imply to me rejection of agape as God’s “perfect essence” (contra the 1st letter of John, where I think it is clear that is what he is saying; nevertheless this gets once again to the question of which verses one takes to con-textualize other verses).
C of itself seems to imply that, of the so-c ...[text shortened]... entric, selfish response in the hopes of personal salvation.
Am I way off the mark with this?
Speaking precisely, God has impersonal love for all mankind. God has personal love for anyone with affinity. All are loved based upon who and what He is; some are loved based upon attributes they possess.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHand what are those attributes that certain people possess?
There is a distinction between personal and impersonal love. Depsite the cold-sounding nature of 'impersonal,' it is not a negative aspect of love. Impersonal simply relies on the subject, not the object; personal relies on the object.
Speaking precisely, God has impersonal love for all mankind. God has personal love for anyone with affinity. All are loved based upon who and what He is; some are loved based upon attributes they possess.
i thought there were none righteous, no not one.
i thought the only "person" god loved for their attributes was jesus. "this is my son, in whom i am well pleased." this was never said about anybody else. certainly saul/paul had nothing to commend him to god.
i cannot agree that god is more attracted to some people than he is to others. that would make xianity an arrogant religion indeed.
Originally posted by Big MacGiven your position, how do you explain the following passage?
i cannot agree that god is more attracted to some people than he is to others. that would make xianity an arrogant religion indeed.
Rom 9:10-21
10Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, "The older will serve the younger."[d] 13Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."[e]
14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."[f] 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."[g] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "[h] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?
Originally posted by Big MacIn and of themselves, no one possesses the attributes of God outside of the members of the Godhead. In His genius, God found a way of imputing His righteousness to man. Among other things, the math is amazing.
and what are those attributes that certain people possess?
i thought there were none righteous, no not one.
i thought the only "person" god loved for their attributes was jesus. "this is my son, in whom i am well pleased." this was never said about anybody else. certainly saul/paul had nothing to commend him to god.
i cannot agree that god is more a ...[text shortened]... ed to some people than he is to others. that would make xianity an arrogant religion indeed.
Originally posted by vistesd...such a God decides to set aside agape in order to satisfy his wrath or insistence on justice.
I would, however, say that the God you describe in your third paragraph cannot be called agape itself, since such a God decides to set aside agape in order to satisfy his wrath or insistence on justice.
A wrathful God may well choose to condemn someone to eternal torment; but that satisfies only vengefulness, not justice or love.
You mustn't forget that God is holy. His 'insistence on justice' arises from His nature, which is holy. Even if He is God, He can't very well change Who He is. His law is holy because He is holy. And His children must obey His law if they are to be holy; indeed, if they are to be His children at all. God's standard is Himself, and He is holy. Everything that is not holy in God's creation (that is, everything that is not perfectly conformed to Him) is doomed to decay and death; everything that is perfectly conformed to God will enjoy eternal life.
The point being missed here is that sinners are condemned to decay and death because of Who God is, not because there is injustice in God. He is holy, and because He is holy, that which is not holy cannot live forever in His presence. This is precisely where Jesus Christ steps onto the scene, and why He is so important to us (whether we know it or not). While the merciful heart of God (agape) desires reconciliation, His nature demands holiness, and holiness means perfect obedience to His law (His will).
In order to satisfy both the demands of His holy nature and the desires of His merciful heart, Jesus Christ was sent to suffer and die in our place for our sins on the cross. This was God's furious, passionate agape love towards us as sinners, perfectly evident in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. To receive God's forgiveness (and to experience His agape love for us) we need only submit to God's word and trust in Jesus Christ as the propitiation for our sins.
Only sinners perceive God's holiness as 'wrathful', but reconciled sinners see God's holiness as sacred. Eternal condemnation as an arbitrary decision made by a fickle, unreasonable God, is simply incorrect in its conceptualization. Eternal condemnation is the only possibility outside of God's salvation through Jesus Christ because outside of His salvation the demands of God's holiness remain. Outside of reconciliation through Christ our sins are not forgiven, and without forgiveness we are still under God's holy law, and the law says that nothing that is not holy will live forever in God's presence.
Originally posted by vistesdScripturally, we are judged by the lives we lived. After we have died, acts of volition are impossible. How can we remedy the choices we made while alive after our lives have already ended? Can we believe in Jesus Christ while our bodies rot away in our coffins? No, by then it's too late; the time for receiving the Lord's grace ends in the first death.
As I have said, I think [b]the love/justice dichotomy is a false one; the issue for salvation is healing, not pardon or punishment. However, even in the juridical model of salvation (1) there is no reason to translate aionios as “eternal,” and (2) eternal punishment is neither loving nor just.[/b]
The grave is not forever; since the Lord made us in His image, we too are eternal. The purpose of the resurrection of sinners is not to allow them another opportunity to believe in Jesus Christ, but exclusively for the purpose of judgment. Given our nature as eternal beings our condemnation will be everlasting, which is called the second death. (The bible is rife with references to the first and second deaths and God's final judgment.)
What is apparent is that not everybody believes in Jesus Christ, and regardless of their reasons why they don't, the fact remains. The operation of sin in the lives of people prevent many from submitting to God's word and believing the Good News.
If sin did not enter into the Lord's creation, then He would not have had the opportunity to express His heart of mercy (evident in His Son, Jesus Christ). Neither would He have the opportunity to express His holiness in the condemnation of unrepentant sinners and their evil deeds through the final judgment.
The Lord does not fail in His purposes, because He planned from the beginning who will receive His wrath and who will receive His grace.
Yes, people choose to submit to God's word and believe the Good News, but only if the Lord first chose them. If not, He hardens the hearts of people against Him because of their sinful ways, making it impossible for them to believe in Jesus Christ.
Biblically speaking, there is no free will. We are either slaves to unrighteousness through sin, or slaves to the Spirit of God unto obedience and life.
All this being said, we are still alive. God's grace is still extended to us and we are still able to receive it wholeheartedly. Who are we to say that God did not choose us! How do we know? No one can say with assurance that God did not choose them, therefore no one can say I don't believe the Good News because God has already rejected me.
I think what makes God's plan so mysterious and confusing is that we do not have the Lord's omniscient vantage point and therefore cannot truly understand where free will and providence collide.
God can't fail. God is the Alpha and Omega. The Beginning and the end. God is Omnipotent, Omniscient; and his wisdow superceeds that of any god, race, human,creature etc.
The extent of God perfect and awesome characters are found embedded in the things around us.
for example, the sun. It has stood there for ages and scientist have been pondering how to explore to capacity its power. Till today, they still cannot.Several creation around attest to the fact that God is too perfect for failure. its a vocabulary that just does not describe any aspect of himđ
Here footnotes to the above posts...
"You are holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel" (Psalm 22:3).
"He is the Lord our God. His justice is seen throughout the land" (1 Chronicles 16:14).
"The law itself is holy, and its commands are holy and right and good" (Romans 7:12).
"Everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard" (Romans 3:23).
"We are made right with God through faith and not by obeying the law" (Romans 3:27-28).
"You must be holy in everything you do, just as God who chose you is holy. For the Scriptures say, “You must be holy because I am holy"" (1 Peter 1:15-16).
"For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16).
"Anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment" (John 3:36).
"Don’t be so surprised! Indeed, the time is coming when all the dead in their graves will hear the voice of God’s Son, and they will rise again. Those who have done good [obey the Good News] will rise to experience eternal life, and those who have continued in evil [disobeyed the Good News] will rise to experience judgment" (John 5:28-29).
"The Spirit alone gives eternal life. Human effort accomplishes nothing. And the very words I have spoken to you are spirit and life" (John 6:63).
"If anyone suffers eternal death, it’s not my fault, for I didn’t shrink from declaring all that God wants you to know" (Acts 20:26-27).
"You are now ashamed of the things you used to do, things that end in eternal doom. But now you are free from the power of sin and have become slaves of God. Now you do those things that lead to holiness and result in eternal life" (Romans 6:21-22).
"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23).
"He will come with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, bringing judgment on those who don’t know God and on those who refuse to obey the Good News of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with eternal destruction, forever separated from the Lord and from his glorious power" (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9).
"But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)" (Ephesians 2:4-5).
"Love does no wrong to others, so love fulfills the requirements of God’s law. This is all the more urgent, for you know how late it is; time is running out. Wake up, for our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed" (Romans 13:10-11).
"Don’t be afraid of those who want to kill your body; they cannot touch your soul. Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28).
"For we must all stand before Christ to be judged. We will each receive whatever we deserve for the good or evil we have done in this earthly body" (2 Corinthians 5:10).
"You didn’t choose me. I chose you. I appointed you to go and produce lasting fruit, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask for, using my name. This is my command: Love each other. If the world hates you, remember that it hated me first. The world would love you as one of its own if you belonged to it, but you are no longer part of the world. I chose you to come out of the world, so it hates you" (John 15:16-18).
"Now you are free from your slavery to sin, and you have become slaves to righteous living" (Romans 6:18).
"God chooses to show mercy to some, and he chooses to harden the hearts of others so they refuse to listen" (Romans 9:18).
"Who is able to advise the Spirit of the Lord? Who knows enough to give him advice or teach him? Has the Lord ever needed anyone’s advice? Does he need instruction about what is good? Did someone teach him what is right or show him the path of justice? No, for all the nations of the world are but a drop in the bucket. They are nothing more than dust on the scales. He picks up the whole earth as though it were a grain of sand" (Isaiah 40:13-15).
Originally posted by vistesdConsider these passages:
The model of salvation as healing, based as I have said, at least in part on the fact that the root meaning of soterias (salvation) is to make well, to make whole, to cure, to heal.
"Love does no wrong to others, so love fulfills the requirements of God’s law. This is all the more urgent, for you know how late it is; time is running out. Wake up, for our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed" (Romans 13:10-11).
"And through your faith, God is protecting you by his power until you receive this salvation, which is ready to be revealed on the last day for all to see" (1 Peter 1:5).
"You have been taught the holy Scriptures from childhood, and they have given you the wisdom to receive the salvation that comes by trusting in Christ Jesus" (2 Timothy 3:15).
From this account it is clear that soteria (salvation) is that which occurs when the Lord returns (the second coming of Christ), not that which occurs when a person first believes the Good News. And soteria is for only those who trust in Christ Jesus.
The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon defines soteria as:
"deliverance, preservation, safety, salvation; deliverance from the molestation of enemies; in an ethical sense, that which concludes to the souls safety or salvation; of Messianic salvation, salvation as the present possession of all true Christians future salvation, the sum of benefits and blessings which the Christians, redeemed from all earthly ills, will enjoy after the visible return of Christ from heaven in the consummated and eternal kingdom of God."
Salvation is deliverence from evil, given to those whose trust rested in Christ. Christians have a hope of salvation because they obey the Good News. Believers still need salvation because they still live in a fallen world, and are still subject to temptation, even though they are forgiven because of their faith. Unbelievers are not given hope of salvation because outside of faith in Jesus Christ there is no hope. In short, there is not a 'model of salvation as healing' which includes those who reject Jesus Christ.
Regarding eternal condemnation: aionio, translated 'eternal', does indeed mean an unlimited span. The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon defines aionio as:
"Without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be without beginning without end, never to cease, everlasting."
When Christ or anyone else refers to 'eternal fire' or 'eternal death' or 'eternal doom', they are indeed speaking of that which is everlasting, i.e. without end.
Originally posted by epiphinehasYou mustn't forget that God is holy.
[b]...such a God decides to set aside agape in order to satisfy his wrath or insistence on justice.
You mustn't forget that God is holy. His 'insistence on justice' arises from His nature, which is holy. Even if He is God, He can't very well change Who He is. His law is holy because He is holy. And His children must obey His law if they the law says that nothing that is not holy will live forever in God's presence.[/b]
I haven’t. Where is a passage that says God is holiness in the same way the John says that God is agape? Otherwise, this is a false dichotomy. God’s holiness is part and parcel of God’s being agape.
While the merciful heart of God (agape) desires reconciliation, His nature demands holiness...
Show me a Biblical passage that says just this... BTW, in the Greek, God’s desire and God’s will are the same. You are setting a “demand” of God against the “will” of God.
In this, and in limiting God as agape by God’s holiness, you are creating a conflict within the Godhead. You are giving God conflicting wills or natures—and then constructing an exegesis to sort them out.
(EDIT: I do realize you are trying to be true to scripture here, and I don’t mean to imply otherwise. I also realize that you are not alone in the doctrinal positions you are expressing. I just think it’s a view that diminishes God as agape, God as all-in-all; and minimizes the meaning and scope of the incarnation/death/resurrection—far more than my non-literalist reading of some of the texts; it seems ironic that where my reading is fairly literal, yours is not.)
After we have died, acts of volition are impossible.
(1) I don’t know what kind of death you’re talking about here; offhand, I am not aware of any clear Biblical statement to this effect. (I assume that you are assigning all volition to sarx?)
(2) Our death does not affect God’s “acts of volition.”
Yes, people choose to submit to God's word and believe the Good News, but only if the Lord first chose them. If not, He hardens the hearts of people against Him because of their sinful ways, making it impossible for them to believe in Jesus Christ.
Then God does not will the reconciliation of all, because he has already chosen (“before time”?) those for whom he wills reconciliation—those whose sinful ways he will allow to be reconciled in Christ, and those he won’t.
1 Corinthians 15:22 for as all (pantes) die in Adam, so all (pantes) will be made alive in Christ... 28 When all (panta)* are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all (panta)* in subjection under him, so that God may be all in all (panta en pasen).
Basically, however you cut it or justify it, you are in fact saying that, although all “die in Adam,” all will not be made alive in Christ—in this life or the next (with or without “ages” in hell).
[* I included this because of your reference, on the other thread, to “all things” not including human beings. The word “things” does not appear in the Greek. panta here is plural (as is pantes); it can mean all, everything, everyone, all together—with the definite article (which occurs in the first instance), according to my UBS (Barclay-Newman) Greek dictionary, it means “entire, whole, all.” There is no linguistic warrant for excluding humanity.]
In short, there is not a 'model of salvation as healing' which includes those who reject Jesus Christ.
Your lexicon seems to limit it’s definitions according to “pre-meditated” (pun intended) theological decisions. Deliverance and preservation are compatible with the root meaning of soterias as making whole, making well, healing.
Keith DeRose, for example (in the article I cited on the other thread), does not disagree with you about rejection of Jesus—what is rejected is that death is a bar. No one in this discussion has attempted to deny a “hell”—only it’s eternalness.
Quite frankly, all other issues here aside, there is not only a “model of salvation as healing” in the NT, it seems to me to be the basic one, almost by definition. That is not to say that the juridical concepts are not there too. But ultimately, one has to be resolved into the other—or the question has to be left open.
_______________________________
QUESTION: Is your view of the final disposition of the “unsaved” one of annihilation or everlasting torment? Both have been expressed in these threads.
Originally posted by epiphinehasI am working through the scriptures, as I said, in order not to piecemeal this too much (though maybe that is unavoidable). I’m glad you moved over to this thread, though.
Consider these passages:
"Love does no wrong to others, so love fulfills the requirements of God’s law. This is all the more urgent, for you know how late it is; time is running out. Wake up, for our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed" (Romans 13:10-11).
"And through your faith, God is protecting you by his power until you r m', they are indeed speaking of that which is everlasting, i.e. without end.
I just want to comment on the translation of aion and its cognates. Here are just a selection of scriptural references—
________________________________________
NRS Romans 16:25 Now to God who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages (aioniois) 26 but is now disclosed...
NRS Matthew 28:20 ...And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age (aionoa).
YLT Mark 10:30 who may not receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and fields, with persecutions, and in the age (aioni) that is coming, life age-during (aionion);*
NRS 1 Corinthians 1:20 ...Where is the debater of this age (aionos? ...
NRS 1 Corinthians 10:11 These things happened to them to serve as an example, and they were written down to instruct us, on whom the ends of the ages (aionion) have come.
NRS Ephesians 2:7 so that in the ages (aionion) to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
* Here, as well as other places, other translations choose to translate zoen aionion as “life eternal.” See below...
____________________________
All of these forms are based on aion, among which translations Liddell-Scott includes a period of existence; a life or lifetime; an age, a generation, a long space of time; and era, an epoch, a definite space of time; and—forever. (The same for other lexicons I’ve checked.)
Young’s Literal Translation (YLT) never translates a form of aion as eternity or eternal or everlasting or forever.
The one word that YLT does translate thus is aidios, in the following two passages:
YLT Romans 1:20 for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world, by the things made being understood, are plainly seen, both His eternal power and Godhead -- to their being inexcusable;
YLT Jude 1:6 messengers also, those who did not keep their own principality, but did leave their proper dwelling, to a judgment of a great day, in bonds everlasting, under darkness He hath kept,
__________________________
It seems clear that selectively translating aion—or any of its cognates—as “eternal” or “eternity” or “everlasting,” etc. in specific contexts, is an interpretive decision based on a theological/soteriological position.
BTW, I did a quick search on “holiness.” The word occurs 29 times in NRSV, 43 times in KJV, 17 times in YLT—I have not tried to sort out the alternative translations that account for this disparity.
However, in all cases, where holiness is ascribed to God, it is as an attribute that God possesses. If John had said that God is loving, or has love, then that would be a similar attribute. What he said, however, is ho theos agape estin—“the/this God agape is.” I take this as a clear statement of essence: what God’s nature fundamentally is.
In the Hebrew scriptures, God’s essence is—well, essentially—being-ness. YHVH (“Yahweh” ) is a verb construct that means “the one who/that is” or simply “who/which is.” This be-ing is One: YHVH echad, in the Shema, the basic creedal statement of Judaism. That being said, I would agree that the primary attribute of God in the Hebrew Scriptures is holiness, and the source of all that is holy:
“Holy, holy, holy—YHVH Tzevaot—[the] fullness of all the earth is your presence.” (Isaiah 6:3; direct translation.)
_________________________________
If one understands that agape is itself holy—such that when one abides in agape, one abides in God—then there is no conflict between agape and holiness.
Originally posted by vistesd"While the merciful heart of God (agape) desires reconciliation, His nature demands holiness..."
You mustn't forget that God is holy.
I haven’t. Where is a passage that says God is holi[b]ness in the same way the John says that God is agape? Otherwise, this is a false dichotomy. God’s holiness is part and parcel of God’s being agape.
While the merciful heart of God (agape) desires reconciliation, His nature demands holiness...[/ are giving God conflicting wills or natures—and then constructing an exegesis to sort them out.[/b]
Show me a Biblical passage that says just this...
Fair enough...
Consider any passage in the bible referring to the strict demands of God's holy law. The requirement of God's law is perfect obedience. There is no way out except through Jesus Christ. In Jesus Christ there is no conflict between God's holy law and His agape, as this passage shows:
"Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved" (Matthew 5:17-18).
You believe I am creating a conflict between God's agape and the demands of His holy law, when, as Jesus points out, the very purpose of the law is mercy. There is no conflict. The purpose of the law is to reveal the true depravity of sin and lead men to repentence; to lead men to Jesus Christ:
"The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure" (Romans 7:10-13).
"Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" (Romans 7:24-25).
Your statement, "God’s holiness is part and parcel of God’s being agape", is right on. Yet, I don't think you really believe that. Your tendency is to ignore the implications of God's holiness in order to make central your own pre-conceived notions of exactly what God's being agape entails.
For instance, if you believe God's being agape entails that He does not judge unrepentant sinners who have rejected Jesus Christ, then you are wrong.
How else can God reconcile unrepentant sinners who have rejected Jesus Christ, when Jesus Christ is the only fulfillment of God's law?