Originally posted by vistesd
This is interesting, Epi: you still choose (b)—though without the “double predestinationism” that you relinquished some time back.
Just a couple side comments—
[b]What happens to a child if you tell him that he is worthless over and over, throughout his entire life? Will he come to value his own decisions? Will he grow up to understand the weight of hi o, whether it is ourselves, other people, or God.
Good place for me to shut up. . . 😉[/b]
This is interesting, Epi: you still choose (b)—though without the “double predestinationism” that you relinquished some time back.
Actually, I choose neither--or both.
(1) Human beings are under God's judgment because, as rational and free creatures, we willingly disobey God.
(2) Therefore, we are, as a whole, in need of God's mercy.
(3) Whether God grants mercy or not, righteousness is fulfilled.
(4) God grants mercy by sending His Son into the world to suffer our judgment on our behalf.
(5) The Holy Spirit strives with men, giving them the ability to choose Jesus Christ.
(6) As rational and free creatures we are allowed to either accept or reject God's mercy.
(6) Some choose to accept God's mercy, some don't.
(7) Righteousness is fulfilled by Christ for those who accept God's mercy.
(8) Otherwise righteousness is fulfilled in a sinner's eternal condemnation.
(9) Either way, God's righteousness prevails, either according to the Law, or according to Grace.
-----------
(a) God is only able to save those who choose to appropriate His grace.
(b) God cannot choose to do any better than He has (without violating the free will of man, which would violate God's law of loving your neighbor as yourself).
Never once did I hear the Christian message that God loves us because we’re lovable. Never once did I hear a message other than that God loves us even though we are unworthy because of our inherent sinfulness; by grace worth may be imputed to our worthlessness, but that’s all. I have never met a Christian of my own age, who grew up in the church, of any mainline denomination, who learned a different message. Hopefully, there are some now—as I think the severity of that message has been moderated in more up-to-date liturgies.
These are the passages which convince me of the Lord's love for all men, His intention to save all men, and that His loving-kindness is the essence of His call to repentance:
"The goodness of God leads you to repentance" (Rom. 2:4).
"We love him, because he first loved us" (1 John 4:19).
"For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:6-8).
"Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life" (Rom. 5:18).
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9).
I haven’t yet seen you point out where the logic is shallow, nor the conclusions flawed—especially since you seem to be articulating (b) very clearly. You are now simply making a defense of that choice. I don’t mean that as a criticism at all—it is the move to the next level, so to speak; but since different folks are going to see the options differently, there are certainly going to be different defenses
God is omnipotent, but He also has a certain character. His character is holy, so He will not allow sinners in His presence. His character is love, so He cannot violate the free will of His creatures. Even though God is omnipotent, doesn't necessarily mean He will do everything He is capable of doing. That is, He will not force you to accept the invitation to reconciliation through Jesus Christ, but neither will He allow you in His presence otherwise.
The logic is shallow, in my opinion, because you do not take into consideration God's character, nor the reality of who we are (which I attempted to describe in my last post). It is essentially accurate logic, but shallow. The conclusions derived from it are also essentially accurate, but flawed in that it is possible to brush them aside without understanding the underlying dynamics, i.e., the underlying dynamics explain adequately what one might otherwise deem unreasonable or illogical in God's plan.