Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Galatians 2:17 "But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be! |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Galatians 2:17 "But if, while we seek to be justified in Christ [by faith], we ourselves are found to be sinners, does that make Christ an advocate or promoter of our sin? Certainly not! |
Bible Question:
Good day Joe, I guess I am too "wordy" as the system keeps telling me that I have exceeded the maximum allowable length for a posting, even after I have tried to "edit it down." I shall break it into two parts. My apologies. First of all, you wrote: "Don't worry about coming across as anagonistic. Healthy discussion and debate is like dessert to me! :) " Thank you for your grace and patience! And this discussion is healthy! Thank you for that too. I read this post from you last night and have given it some thought. Please carefully consider the following points and/or questions and, if I am misunderstanding the Reformed view somehow, please show me what it is that I am missing. You write: "I find you framing Chapter III of the Westminster Confession as a contradiction a little difficult to work with," Good; it's not just me then!!! My problem (or at least one of my two main problems) with the strongly Reformed (Calvanist) point of view is that I do not know how to "frame it" so that it is anything other than a contradiction. I do not know how these two things can both be true at the same time. That is what I am hoping to answer by starting this thread. You then write: "You see, all believers in the Bible have to reconcile an omipotent, omniscient God with the fact that He created beings who would rebel against Him (Satan and his angels and human beings)." That is very true! And then you wrote (and this is what I had to really think about!): "The way, I see it, there are three options in explaining why he would do such a thing: "1. He did not know they would sin against Him when he created them. "2. He did know that they would sin when He created them, but decided to "work around" that to glorify Himself anyway. "3. He did know that they would sin when He created them, and fully intended to work through their rebellion to glorify Himself." And then you conclude your following paragraph by saying: "I embrace (3) as being the biblical answer." Of the 3 options that you have given here, I would embrace (3) as being the most biblical answer just as you do. But sir, with all due respect, it seems to me that you have not fairly (or maybe I should say "completely") stated the strongly Reformed (Calvanist) position in any of your three options. You third option clearly states God's *foreknowledge* of sin (which I believe even the most staunch Arminian would agree to), but it does not declare that God did actually pre-determine (predestinate) sin in such a way that it could not have occurred any other way than *exactly* as He determined it would. If that is not a correct representation the strongly Reformed (Calvanist) position, then maybe that is the part I do not understand and why this issue seems so contradictory. But, from what I have read and heard, so far at least, I think that I do understand at least this part of the Calvanist point of view correctly. Thus my quandry (spelling?). More in "part 2." |
Bible Answer: Normally, posts that are directed to one forum member in particular are not posted as "Primary questions." When the posted question is overly long, such posts can be irritating since others have to scroll past them to read other questions which are truly meant for anyone and everyone on the Forum. |