Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How did sin originate | Bible general Archive 1 | congregationalist | 44246 | ||
Hi New Creature, I appreciate your reply. You seem to be in agreement with me that, according to Scripture, God is sovereign, i.e. God has absolute, personal control over the events of the universe, including ordaining and therefore knowing the number of hairs on your head at any given moment or the number of mosquitos in the state of Vermont. He, God that is, foreordained before the foundation of the world that Jesus Christ would be born of the virgin, live a sinless life and die on the cross in order to redeem his people, his elect, from hell and nothing, absolutely nothing could hinder God's decree, not because He looked through time and saw it coming, quite the opposite, it came to pass because He foreordained it to achieve His purpose. Now if this is your view (this is certainly mine) then I don't see how free will fits in unless you explain a bit more about what you mean by 'free will'. I've heard and read quite contrasting definitions of this confusing term so you might want to offer yours if you don't mind. Now to 2 Pet 3:9 Your interpretation implies a God who wills one thing but something completely the opposite happens - God wills that Judas would be saved and not perish but something (or someone) prevented God from fulfilling His own will. Such interpretation denies God's omnipotence (even though you might not want to mean it, but conclusion certainly follows from your exegesis), He does whatsoever He wills, remember the Psalms I quoted last time? Your interpretation makes either Peter or some Psalms stating a falsity and if you believe the Scripture is God's word, and therefore inerrant, then you have to admit there's something wrong with your interpretation and I think I know what it is. To avoid a difficulty 2 Pet 3:9 could present it needs to be realised that God's will should be properly understood as being decretive, on one hand, and perceptive on the other. God's decretive will is mostly hidden from us but we, however, do learn some of His decretive will as the history unfolds. For instance in Acts 4:27-28 we learn that God determined that His Son shall be murdered by the hands of the people of Jerusalem (...to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel [God's that is] determined before to be done, Acts 4:28). God also determined that no one else but Judas will betray Christ and obviously Judas could not get sick or change his mind about betraying Christ for God has determined him to do so (thus goes away free will theology). This is an example of a decretive will of God, some of it we know because it already been fulfilled, some we know will happen in the future (the return of Christ or the resurrection) but most of God's decretive will we do not know (Deut 29:29). Now the best, or at least the best known, example of perceptive will of God is the Ten Commandments. God desires that no one will murder or dishonour their parents, and yet the Ten Commandments are disobeyed all the time, including by Christians as well, He desires that the law would be kept perfect and we would avoid hell as a result but God obviously does not decree such our performance, He actually decrees that we fall. This is necessarily follows from the doctrine of the sovereignty of God whether we like it or not and to answer your original question 'how did sin originate' it should be said that God predetermined, foreordained sin to happen even though the sole responsibility for committing sin lies with Adam alone as our representative and us by, firstly, imputation of sin to us when we are born and secondly by our committing sins ourselves. God’s foreordination of sin does not in any way makes Him culpable for our actual sinning, this is just does not follow logically nor scripturally for whatever God does is good and just, therefore foreordaining sin is good and just as opposed to sinning. Sinning is evil and wicked and this is what we do. God, in the first place, has no law answerable to and by definition cannot sin for there’s no law for him to break thus trying to make God responsible for our sinful action is wrong off the start, whatever the means are chosen for the task but, as I mentioned previously, if God is sovereign, it follows necessarily God and no one else willed and foreordained the fall of man as well as some angels. Also, finally, note who Peter addresses in the epistle (and the passage as well). It is 'us', 'the beloved', 'brethren' and so on. Of the same people, that is saved and regenerated Christians, Peter says "The Lord is... longsuffering to us-ward, [us-ward, Christians that is] not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance [that is all the elect, they and they alone should come to repentance]. |
||||||
2 | How did sin originate | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 44271 | ||
Congregationalist...extract from your post: _...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance [that is all the elect, they and they alone should come to repentance]_ It has been my observation that the Reformed/Calvinist camp is fond of using brackets after passages in Scripture that say _all_ or _whosoever will_ and other synonymous terms, in order to promulgate their view that what the passage really means is not _all_ at all but the elect. --Hank | ||||||
3 | How did sin originate | Bible general Archive 1 | congregationalist | 44371 | ||
Hi Hank, you wrote to me: "...It has been my observation that the Reformed/Calvinist camp is fond of using brackets after passages in Scripture that say _all_ or _whosoever will_ and other synonymous terms, in order to promulgate their view that what the passage really means is not _all_ at all but the elect." But isn't it called 'exegesis'? My starting point is an axiom that the Bible alone is the word of God written and therefore inerrant (the 'therefore' is of course a conclusion, not an axiom). I further deduce that because Scripture is inerrant it contains no contradictions (for in contradiction at least one part of it is false). Because Scripture teaches that 1) God does whatsoever He wills (agreed?) and 2) that not all men will be saved (agreed?), it follows *necessarily* that God does not will that every single individual will be saved or to be more formal as per the argument God wills that not every single individual will be saved. You may not like the logic of this argument and this is fine (as far as this discussion goes of course, otherwise it's not fine at all) but you have to reconcile one scripture with another scripture if you are willing to take an approach like the one you seem to be taking. For instance, when Christ said that he is the bread of life you of course do not take it to mean he is made of dough, you use your intellect and other scriptures to deduce what Christ meant by calling himself 'bread' or 'the door' or 'the way' and so on. So it is with the passage we are looking at. The overwhelming scriptural teaching is that God alone is sovereign and He alone decides or rather decrees who is going to be saved or damned and therefore 2 Pet 3:9 and a few other passages do not teach that God wills to save all men but decrees to damn some (or most) contrary to His own will. Further, if you are willing to say that 'all' always means 'every single individual' every time we read 'all' referring to people, then look at how much nonsense this no-exegesis can create: Mat 2:3: When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. would you say then that every one in Jerusalem was troubled? Mark 13:13: And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.. does it mean that all men will hate Christians? John 8:2: And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him... does it mean all people in the universe who ever lived? all people of Jerusalem? all people of the neighbourhood? who are these 'all'? I'm simply trying to show you that there's no reason whatever to assume that 'all' in 2Pet 3:9 means 'all people without exception' and BTW I have briefly said why I don't think the passage doesn't teach that God wills all people to be saved based on the passage itself and maybe you should give your reasons why you don't accept my exegesis. I mean I know you don't believe what I believe concerning this passage but I gave you my reason why I believe what I believe, you didn't give me yours (which is OK if you don't want to). And lastly, I'm well aware how John 3:16 is often misapplied today to make people believe what the passage does not teach, namely that God loves every person without exception and wills everyone to come to saving faith but I don't think people who teach that looked closely just two verses below, on v18, that is where we read that "...he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." The full teaching then is 'God loves everyone without exception and wills everyone without exception to come to saving faith but He already condemned some for their disbelief'. I don't think this teaches the God of scripture. The God of scripture already elected His church before foundation of the world, appointed His Son to redeem this church from their sin and damned the rest for their unbelief. And why they did not believe? Free will?. Well, Christ told us why - "Jonh 10:26: But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.." People do not believe because they are not Christ's sheep and the sheep was obviously chosen before the world begun, there's simply no room in the Bible for free will theology. He chose to save some and not others and this very doctrine every believer *should* find the greatest comfort knowing that nothing will separate him, the believer, from the love of God because Christ already fully appeased God's wrath on the cross and the sin is paid off in full, it is as Christ said finished. |
||||||