Is God a Monster?

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Sat Dec 09, 2017 10:09 am

remade wrote:One that might be used, is that Titus 2:11 says "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people." However, we come back to the main gist of the argument, I think, Calvinists will say, "Yeah it appeared for all people. It was only effective for the elect." And Arminians will say, "It's effective for all people, sadly those who reject God freely don't receive it though."
Hi Remade,

Thanks for the response. The Arminian response to Titus 2:11 would not hold up to further scrutiny when factoring in the historical context and audience relevance of said passage. A pithy breakdown would be as follows: (a) Paul’s use of “all” is qualified by his inspired understanding of THAT or HIS current age coming to an end with Jesus’ return (verses 12, 13 & 1 Cor. 10:11); and (b) Paul’s use of “all” in their age ending events is qualified or defined by their inhabited world (oikoumenē) or the known Roman Empire; thus, when Jesus said “the end” will come when the gospel is preached in “all the world” (Matt 24:14) and Paul denotes that this was fulfilled by saying the gospel was indeed preached to every creature under heaven--in HIS current age (Col 1:23), then Titus 2:11 DOES NOT refer to “all men” outside of the oikoumene, such as the American and Australian continents or other parts of the globe.

So again, does “the gift” that Paul describes apply to every human being or not? I personally see no evidence of this in any inspired writings, especially when scrutinized exegetically. Without question, God the Father is the initiator of any return from spiritual death. Therefore, does HE quicken all humans (past, present, and future) to then exercise “free will” to except or reject HIS gift? We cannot exercise “free will” in spiritual truths when we are spiritually dead. A major tenet of “the gift” is to have the privilege to accept or reject—once our spiritual eyes are opened to the truth. Jesus said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father (John 6:65). Incidentally, according to Jesus, what we know or don’t know have consequences (Luke 12:47-48).

The John verses can be treated with the same scrutiny. Do the "whosever" passages address humans from Adam to THEIR present ministry? No, they do not. These passages address an age ending event relevant to the preaching of the gospel within the oikoumenē. Nevertheless, if God intends on bringing "all" to salvation, I would be extremely over joyed to this concept (universalism). But, the NT writers are mainly focused on their oikoumenē, regarding the gospel, when we closely examine their understanding. Therefore, in the age to come, is "the gift" any different from Adam to the end of the old covenant age? In other words, how did the ancient world, outside of Israel and the middle east, receive God's salvation? For example, the American and Australian continents.

Jesus and the NT writers believed that only one generation of people, within a regional habitation, would experience the gospel message first-hand and its consummation. The "all" will 99.9% of the time refer to the 1st century audience, not the entire inhabitants of the planet. IMHO, if we look at Calvinism and Arminianism in the light of the historical context of the 1st century believers and their oikoumene, Calvinism may hold a more tenable position. I say this because Mark 16:15 suggests that "the gift" is given to all who hear the preaching of the gospel, then having their spiritual eyes open, they may choose to believe or not. So, is all who hear the gospel a recipient of "the gift" and those who never heard of such gospel excluded or judged by other means? This sounds plausible.

God bless.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:07 pm

Consider the following:

1 Timothy 2:3-4, New American Standard Bible
3. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4. who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


1. God's desire is in the present indicative active. God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written.

2. To be saved is punctiliar passive. Their salvation is a gift from God.

3. "All" literally means every person in the context of 1 Timothy I-6. Context is the primary means of determining words. It is admitted that "all" is not always literally everyone.

4. God's will is not entirely accomplished because His Grace is rejected by some.

And consider:

Ephesians 2:8
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Compare to the above. The gift is being saved; faith is our response to grace.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Mon Dec 11, 2017 8:14 pm

Homer wrote:Consider the following:

1 Timothy 2:3-4, New American Standard Bible
3. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4. who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


1. God's desire is in the present indicative active. God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written.
Hi Homer,

You said, "God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written." But my brother, the context clearly denotes being saved through the knowledge of the truth, which vs. 5 clearly states one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The "all" can only refer to the "world" in which this knowledge was known, not the entire planet, who had no knowledge of Jesus.
Homer wrote:3. "All" literally means every person in the context of 1 Timothy I-6. Context is the primary means of determining words. It is admitted that "all" is not always literally everyone.
I agree, and Paul gives the context by which God desires all men to be saved, through the knowledge of the truth of Christ Jesus, at that time in place--in Israel's last days. This is why Paul proclaimed Jesus' sign/prophecy of the gospel being preached in all the world before the end, was indeed fulfilled, thus, I appreciate 1 Timothy for the audience relevance and expectation of their promised world deliverance. But getting back on track, God desires all peoples to be saved after hearing the gospel message, but God must quicken their dead spiritual condition for them to exercise free-will to receive or reject God's gift. The question still remains, does He or will He bring all of mankind, past, present, or future to this same standard? If so, Calvinism is false, for all would be given the gift, and Arminianism would be tenable. But where's the scriptural support for all of mankind being made alive to exercise their free-will to respond? A spiritually dead person can't do it on his own.

Thanks for the conversation my friend, it's always a pleasure getting your perspective and feedback.

Blessings

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Tue Dec 12, 2017 11:22 am

Hi Robby,

You appear to be confused. You wrote:
You said, "God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written." But my brother, the context clearly denotes being saved through the knowledge of the truth, which vs. 5 clearly states one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The "all" can only refer to the "world" in which this knowledge was known, not the entire planet, who had no knowledge of Jesus.
The point I was making is that at the time Paul wrote those words God wanted all men to be saved. That desire of His continues to be true to this day.

Consider an example of the present indicative active spoken by our Lord Jesus:

Matthew 7:17 (NASB)
17. So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.


"Bears" is present indicative active. At the time Jesus spoke it was true, always had been true, and continues to be true today. Of course they are saved by hearing the gospel; that is the reason for the great commission to "go into all the world". I'm puzzled by your tresponse. Do you believe Jesus' commission has been fulfilled and is now invalid?

User avatar
mattrose
Posts: 1920
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:28 am
Contact:

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by mattrose » Tue Dec 12, 2017 2:40 pm

remade wrote: Hi Matt -

You called me out on some good things there. Thank-you brother.

To be succinct, I do understand that understanding soteriology is a "search for certainty of truth." In my own research on soteriology, I have greatly grown and appreciated how God has used it to humble me, and mature me in my faith and I am grateful for it.

If I can try and help myself from writing endless paragraphs, I think the point I was trying to make is:

+ Teachings on soteriology that not only prove one's points, but also build straw man arguments in other points that said teacher does not believe (like me and my reference to open theism; even in my sin I prove my point ;) ) are not helpful.
Obviously nobody should be using straw man arguments. I agree that these are not helpful. But it is often done unintentionally and it is often through good dialogue with one another that we discover such straw men.
+ I appreciate Gregg's teachings, and learn a lot from them. I appreciate John Piper's teachings, I appreciate Robert Pircilli's teachings. I personally don't appreciate when Gregg teaches us what Calvinists believe in his point of view, I don't appreciate when Piper teaches what Arminians believe in his point of view. I love Gregg, and from the posts I've read from you I love you and believe that you love Jesus and seek the furthering of His Kingdom. I guess my main objection is that when we say, "How dare those Calvinists and their tyrant gods," and again - proving my own case, the human propensity to say, "How dare those wacky open theists," are people seeking for knowledge that puffs up, or love that edifies - to use the scriptural quote in the top-right hand side of your screen right now.
I guess I just disagree with you on this point. I don't think it is out-of-bounds at all to describe views that you disagree with. Of course, a teacher should seek first-hand knowledge of those views (from the horses mouth) and not just caricatures. But once that work has been done, it is just good teaching to present one's findings. If I do the research and conclude that the logical conclusions of Calvinism seem, to me, to be profoundly troubling, then I should warn others about that. In doing so, I subject myself to scrutiny. In some cases, more informed people will be able to correct my misunderstanding of their view. In other cases, the critique will create important dialogue that causes the church to work through truth matters. The only downside of this process is when any of it is done with a spirit of pride and/or divisiveness. But I think you may be too quick to interpret all tension as divisive. I think tension is often quite healthy.
One other thing, is that when my soteriology or anyone's soteriology and teaching on said matters takes too much time from Gospel proclamation, that is inviting people to come to Jesus, it becomes problematic.

One thing I liked about Mark Driscoll before he fell from grace (to use an Arminian term to describe a Calvinst), is that though he believed(s) in Reformed soteriology, he limited his espousal of those doctrines to far and few between, and really preached like an Arminian.
As I've already stated, I think you are incorrect in equating the 'gospel' with simply 'inviting people to come to Jesus'. The Gospel is much bigger than that. It encompasses the whole of the Christian life.

Thanks for the dialogue

God bless!

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Dec 12, 2017 8:05 pm

Homer wrote:Hi Robby,

You appear to be confused. You wrote:
You said, "God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written." But my brother, the context clearly denotes being saved through the knowledge of the truth, which vs. 5 clearly states one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The "all" can only refer to the "world" in which this knowledge was known, not the entire planet, who had no knowledge of Jesus.
The point I was making is that at the time Paul wrote those words God wanted all men to be saved. That desire of His continues to be true to this day.

Consider an example of the present indicative active spoken by our Lord Jesus:

Matthew 7:17 (NASB)
17. So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.


"Bears" is present indicative active. At the time Jesus spoke it was true, always had been true, and continues to be true today. Of course they are saved by hearing the gospel; that is the reason for the great commission to "go into all the world". I'm puzzled by your tresponse. Do you believe Jesus' commission has been fulfilled and is now invalid?
Hi Homer,

No worries, but Paul’s understanding does not emphasize all of mankind who has ever lived. “ALL” is confined to “the world” in which THEY preached the gospel to every creature (Matt 24:14). Like I mentioned before, Paul said this last days’ prophecy was fulfilled in his day. Therefore, the present active indicative must be taken in context of the last days narrative.

Nevertheless, did “ALL” receive a spiritual quickening from spiritual death in order to exercise free will to accept or reject Jesus? Again, this could only happen through the hearing of the gospel message. If so, Calvinism loses its validity and Arminianism is tenable because God must first quicken the spiritually dead, for they cannot quicken themselves to spiritual truths. I believe if we keep the last days where they belong, we could better see the flaws in Calvinistic dogma.

As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire. This is very clear to me when reading the NT writers letters and understanding.

I have to stop now because I’m seriously tired, but I hope to continue the discussion by and by.

Blessings my friend!

User avatar
Candlepower
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:26 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Candlepower » Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:08 am

robbyyoung wrote:As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire.
If I'm reading you right, Robby, I'm sure glad you're wrong about this. Based on the quote above, I must ask if you think Jesus' command to make disciples, to baptize them, and to teach them to obey Him ended with Israel's last days during the 1st century, and was limited to the territory controlled by Rome? If so, then there could be no Christianity today, because Christians are defined as being disciples of Jesus. If discipling ended 1900 years ago, then there could be no Christians today. Is that what you believe? I must be missing something. Please clarify.

User avatar
Homer
Posts: 2995
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by Homer » Wed Dec 13, 2017 11:30 pm

Robby,

You wrote:
You said, "God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written." But my brother, the context clearly denotes being saved through the knowledge of the truth, which vs. 5 clearly states one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The "all" can only refer to the "world" in which this knowledge was known, not the entire planet, who had no knowledge of Jesus.
Even if it is acknowledged (which I don't) that Paul only had in mind the part of the world he knew of, my point still stands. In your understanding you acknowledge the knowledge of the gospel had been disseminated throughout all the world Paul knew of. Yet the great majority of these people, at the time Paul wrote to Timothy, were not saved as God desired. It was His desired will that they all would be saved, concurrently with Paul's writing the words to Timothy, but not His determined will. They still had a choice to believe or not; "the gospel... is the power unto salvation".

Regarding the claim that God only desired, at the time Paul wrote, for the salvation of those who lived in the part of the world known to Paul, you have Paul delimiting God's love for mankind.

Christians generally believe that God's promise to Abraham was a prophecy of the Christ:

Genesis 22:18 (NASB)
18. In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”

I don't believe you will argue that the promise to Abraham would be limited to Paul's knowledge of the extent of the world. And consider John 3:16:

John 3:16 (NASB)
16. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

And surely it can not be maintained that Jesus was ignorant of the extent of the population of the world and the extent of God's desire for them all to be saved. Paul's words to Timothy are an echo of Jesus' words reported by John.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Thu Dec 14, 2017 3:18 am

Homer wrote:Robby,

You wrote:
You said, "God, at the time Paul wrote, willed all mankind to be saved now. He was willing them to be saved at the time these words were written." But my brother, the context clearly denotes being saved through the knowledge of the truth, which vs. 5 clearly states one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. The "all" can only refer to the "world" in which this knowledge was known, not the entire planet, who had no knowledge of Jesus.
Hi Homer,
Homer wrote:Even if it is acknowledged (which I don't) that Paul only had in mind the part of the world he knew of,...
As you know, Paul's letter was not written to you, I nor anyone else outside of the affected prophetic time statements, which guided the Apostles' ministry to the people of their day. If we are to be reasonable students of Paul's inspired mindset, I believe he exactly describes fulfillment of Mark 16:15. Here's a brief and responsible 2 point study that will prove my case:

1. The greek word oikoumenē is used to describe what world the NT writers are concerned with. Strong states the primary position as the inhabited earth contextualized as: (a) the portion of the earth inhabited by the Greeks, in distinction from the lands of the barbarians; and (b) the Roman empire, all the subjects of the empire. For example, Luke 2:1, Acts 11:28, Acts 17:6, and Acts 24:5. Moreover, this world is inferred or implied to in Acts 2:5, is it not? Therefore, when we clearly understand THEIR intent and understanding, the greek word kosmos--when used to simply denote an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government (Strong)--can illustrate a supportive understanding of oikoumenē in light of verses like: Rom 1:8, Col 1:6, and Rom 10:18. So, although you prefer or choose to believe a global scenario, this is not supported in THEIR writings. You are imposing your own interpretation on the text, instead of letting THEIR words give you THEIR mindset and understanding.

2. Colossians 1:23, "if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister." However interpreted, Paul made it clear that the words of Christ in Matthew 24:14 were fulfilled in his own time.

Now I established all of this in order to examine or scrutinize the Calvin and Arminian positions in the confined context of the 1st Century believers, their world, and their understanding.
Homer wrote:my point still stands. In your understanding you acknowledge the knowledge of the gospel had been disseminated throughout all the world Paul knew of. Yet the great majority of these people, at the time Paul wrote to Timothy, were not saved as God desired. It was His desired will that they all would be saved, concurrently with Paul's writing the words to Timothy, but not His determined will. They still had a choice to believe or not; "the gospel... is the power unto salvation".
Well, now that I established what world is in view, are you making an argument for "ALL" under the hearing of the gospel were quicken by God to accept or reject "the gift" of salvation? Or, that "ALL" can make this decision on their own, apart from God first qualifying their spiritually dead condition? I contend that the NT Writers illustrate a prophetic understanding of the gospel message to an exclusive audience in Israel's last days. Unfortunately, the apostolic era, with THEIR limited world view to last days events, have been hi-jacked by later uninspired men effecting the convoluted mess we have today.
Homer wrote:Regarding the claim that God only desired, at the time Paul wrote, for the salvation of those who lived in the part of the world known to Paul, you have Paul delimiting God's love for mankind.
No I don't, my friend. After God deals with Israel's last days, within the oikoumenē, the rest of mankind tabernacle's directly with God (Rev 21:3).
Homer wrote:Christians generally believe that God's promise to Abraham was a prophecy of the Christ:

Genesis 22:18 (NASB)
18. In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.”

I don't believe you will argue that the promise to Abraham would be limited to Paul's knowledge of the extent of the world. And consider John 3:16:

John 3:16 (NASB)
16. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

And surely it can not be maintained that Jesus was ignorant of the extent of the population of the world and the extent of God's desire for them all to be saved. Paul's words to Timothy are an echo of Jesus' words reported by John.
Homer, John 3:16 is primarily dealing with Israel's last days, and Jesus was sent into that world to fulfill prophecy. For thousands of years people have been and are being deliverd without having knowledge of Jesus or the gospel message. Again, we are judged on what we know and don't know, but nevertheless, God is the judge. The whosever passages makes perfect sense when understood within the NT Writers' application/context. Additionally, the last inspired writers are the only ones who can give a correct understanding of OT prophecy. IMO, Paul was quite clear concerning these issues and the world in view.

Blessings.
Last edited by robbyyoung on Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:38 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Is God a Monster?

Post by robbyyoung » Thu Dec 14, 2017 6:00 am

Candlepower wrote:
robbyyoung wrote:As for the “great commission”, this was specifically given for Israel’s last days, which was in the 1st century, encompassing the known Roman Empire.
If I'm reading you right, Robby, I'm sure glad you're wrong about this. Based on the quote above, I must ask if you think Jesus' command to make disciples, to baptize them, and to teach them to obey Him ended with Israel's last days during the 1st century, and was limited to the territory controlled by Rome? If so, then there could be no Christianity today, because Christians are defined as being disciples of Jesus. If discipling ended 1900 years ago, then there could be no Christians today. Is that what you believe? I must be missing something. Please clarify.
Hi Candlepower,

No worries. But Christianity and Christ's kingdom is eternal, however, hi-jacking Israel's last days for our own is absolute folly. We simply enjoy God's tabernacle among us now and live Godly lives. Just like millions have done without ever hearing such a gospel or Jesus himself. These passages specifically dealt with a world inherently affected by Israel's last days. If we chose to proclaim the gospel message to others as a historical fact to help others turn to God, well then that's great! But there is somebody in the world who is alienated from this message, so what about them? They will die and still be judged, but according to what standard? It cannot be for rejecting the gospel message that they never heard, can it? This is the problem with hi-jacking things that do not pertain to you. The scriptures are clear that the gospel message was preached to ALL the intended creation of Paul's world. Those who rejected it, after being spiritually revived to hear it, would be condemned. These proclamations are very easy to understand in their proper context, especially as it relates to fulfillment.

Blessings.

Post Reply

Return to “Calvinism, Arminianism & Open Theism”