06 Nov 20
@secondson saidI’m sure you will, just as soon as you get back from your “bathroom break” (sic) or when he’ll freezes over.
If I find the time and enthusiasm enough to take you on with regards to the reality behind the use of metaphorical terms found in the Bible, specifically related to hell, and the reality of it, I'll start a new thread on the subject.
06 Nov 20
@divegeester saidWell, frankly, I see no need to start a new thread, really, since you brought up the matter here in this one.
I’m sure you will, just as soon as you get back from your “bathroom break” (sic) or when he’ll freezes over.
But first - you said in an earlier post that you "believe in ultimate sovereignty of God and in his ultimate reconciliation of mankind."
Of course God is ultimately sovereign, no argument there, but your assertion that "mankind" will be reconciled, and what you mean by that, is unclear.
Are you saying that every single person that was ever born will be saved?
If so, then provide proof, and not from your mind, but from the scriptures. I mean, show me where in the Bible it says that.
After all, that's a heavy duty doctrine. There certainly must be verses and passages to support that truth!
07 Nov 20
1 edit
@secondson saidI come to my position via a route of default accepted beliefs and rejected doctrine. Bear with me, I’m explaining not asking you to believe it.
Well, frankly, I see no need to start a new thread, really, since you brought up the matter here in this one.
But first - you said in an earlier post that you "believe in ultimate sovereignty of God and in his ultimate reconciliation of mankind."
Of course God is ultimately sovereign, no argument there, but your assertion that "mankind" will be reconciled, and what yo ...[text shortened]... ll, that's a heavy duty doctrine. There certainly must be verses and passages to support that truth!
1) The is no literal hell and eternal suffering is simply incongruous and inconsistent with the loving merciful and redeeming god of the bible. So what’s next then?
2) then there is either annihilation or no annihilation. I don’t believe that everyone is resurrected, bows the knee and then gets a “sorry you’re dead man walking anyway”.
3) by default then everyone lives.
More or less that’s it.
However this does not mean that people aren’t disciplined, punished or rewarded on earth and in heaven/after life. There is ample scripture supporting this.
What’s uncomfortable?
Turning away from established beliefs
The thought that Hitler won’t get burnt alive
The thought that people of other religions make it.
Remember
There is reward and authority in heaven, people will be differentiated and there will be an expanded new creation to err... manage or whatever.
In scripture, there is the “bride” herself, and the “friends of the bride” separately.
Jesus will not be in hell overseeing the eternal torture of wrongdoers and unbelievers. If this is what it’s meant to be then I’ll toe the line to escape it, but I’ll hate him and everything he stands for.
07 Nov 20
1 edit
@divegeester saidTruly, I understand your position. I'm not your enemy just because I don't agree with it.
I come to my position via a route of default accepted beliefs and rejected doctrine. Bear with me, I’m explaining not asking you to believe it.
1) The is no literal hell and eternal suffering is simply incongruous and inconsistent with the loving merciful and redeeming god of the bible. So what’s next then?
2) then there is either annihilation or no annihilation. I ...[text shortened]... t’s meant to be then I’ll toe the line to escape it, but I’ll hate him and everything he stands for.
I'm not at all certain how to go about discussing this issue and yet not allowing it to get out of hand. If you know what I mean.
I think my position is undergirded by who God is, just as your position is. You say that you perceive God in such a way as to make it impossible to imagine how He would punish the unbelieving masses with "everlasting" fire. I empathize with that perspective, but then I perceive God relative to His Holiness, and how, because of that, those that die in their sin can never appear in His presence.
The Bible speaks nothing about annihilation, but it makes "judgement" and "separation" perfectly clear.
You and I may decide to debate, argue and discuss with each other the merits of our mutually exclusive positions, but in the end, out there in eternity, I am personally grateful that the judgement of the lost doesn't fall on me.
07 Nov 20
@SecondSon
You said in a post above that "God is ultimately sovereign" and I agree, but what does this actually mean?
He is all powerful and in control of all things. He is accountable and responsible. Agreed?
Take your salvation: do you take any credit for it at all? I don't for mine, non whatsoever. God takes all the credit, he did all the work. But what then of the unsaved?
If God takes all of the credit then why should the lost take all of the responsibility for their condition? Least of all to be kept alive and burnt in a furnace for eternity! It doesn't add up.
It is not that our condition and behaviour is undeserving of punishment it is that our condition is God's responsibility, he acknowledges that responsibility and has acted accordingly. We know this, right.
If God takes all the credit for the redeemed, then he takes all the responsibility for the lost. He is after all all powerful.
Christ has done all the redemptive work and takes all the credit.
07 Nov 20
@divegeester saidDo you think there are some that God fails to, or chooses not to, save?
@SecondSon
You said in a post above that "God is ultimately sovereign" and I agree, but what does this actually mean?
He is all powerful and in control of all things. He is accountable and responsible. Agreed?
Take your salvation: do you take any credit for it at all? I don't for mine, non whatsoever. God takes all the credit, he did all the work. But what then o ...[text shortened]... st. He is after all all powerful.
Christ has done all the redemptive work and takes all the credit.
07 Nov 20
@divegeester saidWithout sounding condescending, I'm happy you understand that salvation is of God, that we had no part in what Christ did in paying the price of our redemption, settled in eternity past before anything was created.
@SecondSon
You said in a post above that "God is ultimately sovereign" and I agree, but what does this actually mean?
He is all powerful and in control of all things. He is accountable and responsible. Agreed?
Take your salvation: do you take any credit for it at all? I don't for mine, non whatsoever. God takes all the credit, he did all the work. But what then o ...[text shortened]... st. He is after all all powerful.
Christ has done all the redemptive work and takes all the credit.
Without appearing to gloss over the points you made relative to the sovereignty of God regarding salvation, which cannot be earned, as we're in agreement, I'd like to make a comment about God's sovereignt, and man's responsibility.
By no means do I claim to understand all about it, but it seems plain to me that both God's sovereignty and man's responsibility go hand in hand throughout scripture, except with regards to salvation, which is entirely of God.
It is true, and you are correct in saying God is accountable and responsible, but not as an aspect of His sovereignty.
Let me explain what I mean. God took the blame for our sins, yes, but not because it was His fault that we sin.
Here's a further complication: have you ever wondered what is meant by "...after the similitude of Adam's transgression,.." found in Romans 5:14?
Sin entered through Adam, but we can't sin like he did. Adam sinned from in the state of perfection and innocence, we don't.
You see, that's why it isn't our fault that we were born with it. And it is for that reason that Christ assumed full responsibility.
BUT
Man was created in the image and likeness of God. We are conscious of right and wrong. The knowledge of good and evil is encrypted in every fiber of our being.
Man has free will. An attribute of being created in the image and likeness of God. Man is an image bearer, and he chooses.
Problem is, when he chooses to do evil, there comes a point when God, in His sovereignty, "gave them up", verses 24 and 26, and "gave them over" in verse 28 of Romans chapter 1, because man chose not to "to retain God in their knowledge."
All of this has been a huge debate in the church for centuries.
It's why I'm a literalist.
07 Nov 20
2 edits
@bigdoggproblem saidAbsolutely not.
Do you think there are some that God fails to, or chooses not to, save?
1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
The 'who' is God. It is God's will that all be saved. This is where man's 'will' comes into play.
Sorry for jumping on your reply to divegeester.
07 Nov 20
@divegeester saidThis is a good example of a fabricated religion. Almost nothing of your doctrine is in the bible. If I am wrong please quote some references instead of just giving us your opinion.
@SecondSon
You said in a post above that "God is ultimately sovereign" and I agree, but what does this actually mean?
He is all powerful and in control of all things. He is accountable and responsible. Agreed?
Take your salvation: do you take any credit for it at all? I don't for mine, non whatsoever. God takes all the credit, he did all the work. But what then o ...[text shortened]... st. He is after all all powerful.
Christ has done all the redemptive work and takes all the credit.
07 Nov 20
@secondson saidAnnihilation just means completely destroyed.
Truly, I understand your position. I'm not your enemy just because I don't agree with it.
I'm not at all certain how to go about discussing this issue and yet not allowing it to get out of hand. If you know what I mean.
I think my position is undergirded by who God is, just as your position is. You say that you perceive God in such a way as to make it impossible to im ...[text shortened]... , out there in eternity, I am personally grateful that the judgement of the lost doesn't fall on me.
That concept is in the bible.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29602
07 Nov 20
@secondson saidI've always had time for stray cats. Currently, we have three that visit our back garden regularly. Two of them are relatively friendly, show appreciation for the food we put out. One however is a mangy old thing, no teeth to speak of. He takes the food but not if we are too close. He has no interest in us, runs away if either of us go out into the garden.
Problem is, when he chooses to do evil, there comes a point when God, in His sovereignty, "gave them up", verses 24 and 26, and "gave them over" in verse 28 of Romans chapter 1, because man chose not to "to retain God in their knowledge."
All of this has been a huge debate in the church for centuries.
It's why I'm a literalist.
Of course, I continue to provide food for all three of them. Even the lost one. Especially the lost one. I don't give up feeding him because of his lack of interest in me. I, as a being of higher intelligence, understand his position and show compassion and the 'same' love I show the other two cats. I don't give up on him, give him over.
07 Nov 20
@ghost-of-a-duke saidSuppose the mangy old cat was also
I've always had time for stray cats. Currently, we have three that visit our back garden regularly. Two of them are relatively friendly, show appreciation for the food we put out. One however is a mangy old thing, no teeth to speak of. He takes the food but not if we are too close. He has no interest in us, runs away if either of us go out into the garden.
Of cours ...[text shortened]... how compassion and the 'same' love I show the other two cats. I don't give up on him, give him over.
- raping and killing baby cats around the village
- stealing and selling drugs to decent cats
- encouraging decent cats to attack your birds and hamsters etc
After you preached to this mangy cat and sent prophet cats [who he killed] to speak to this cat, without success, what would you do?
08 Nov 20
@ghost-of-a-duke saidPoor analogy. God didn't create cats in His image and likeness, nor do cats have free will. Cats act in response to instinct, as do all animals. Lab tests notwithstanding.
I've always had time for stray cats. Currently, we have three that visit our back garden regularly. Two of them are relatively friendly, show appreciation for the food we put out. One however is a mangy old thing, no teeth to speak of. He takes the food but not if we are too close. He has no interest in us, runs away if either of us go out into the garden.
Of cours ...[text shortened]... how compassion and the 'same' love I show the other two cats. I don't give up on him, give him over.
Man is aware, conscious of something greater than himself. Man, not animals asks the questions, what am I? How did I get here? What happens after I die? Not so with animals.
And no human being was ever charged with murder for killing an animal.
Perhaps you think God is dispassionate toward man by warning man about the consequences of rejecting Him, and that somehow the threat of judgement and everlasting punishment is the act of a monster.
Nothing could be further from the truth. God took the most precious thing in existence and crushed it, firing down on His only begotten Son all of His wrath and indignation, and somehow leaving him there in the darkness of eternal separation so that a rational human being could see that and understand just how much God loves him.
The price of redemption. The choice is up to each individual. Believe or reject. Both decisions come with eternal consequences.
Your analogy doesn't work because it doesn't measure up to the seriousness of the matter. No one ever died for a cat.
08 Nov 20
@bigdoggproblem saidNo I don’t think that at all. Did you see my previous post?
Do you think there are some that God fails to, or chooses not to, save?