Do you Believe that God is "PERFECTLY LOVING?

Originally Posted by crakjak

Again, Chan you are attributing these statements to eternity, when in fact they are speaking of earthly purposes. Speaking of Esau and Jacob, the love and hate is defined by their earthly positioning; "the older will serve the younger", not one saved and the other lost.

No, I'm simply asserting that God is absolutely sovereign and gets to do whatever He pleases.

When God thinks of the election of Jacob, He clearly has in mind the struggle between Jacob and Esau for the birthright and for their father's blessing. This in no way is defining their future end.

The struggle was merely how God's plan was carried out.

The question directed to God, 'why have you made me like this?' is speaking again of earthly purpose, not eternal destination. It is error to so define the character of God. How can you possibly attribute to a perfectly loving God the idea of committing any human to "endless torture"? It is simply erroneous human reasoning.

No, the passage has to do with the created being not having the right to protest God's purposes. God WILL have mercy on whomever He chooses and He will withhold mercy from whomever He chooses.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Chan

No, I'm simply asserting that God is absolutely sovereign and gets to do whatever He pleases.

The struggle was merely how God's plan was carried out.

No, the passage has to do with the created being not having the right to protest God's purposes. God WILL have mercy on whomever He chooses and He will withhold mercy from whomever He chooses.

Okay, I don't see in the your responses any disagreement.

In obedience we experience God's mercy as kindness; when in disobedience we experience God's mercy as severity (purifying love).

Though the unbelieving Jews were "enemies of God" (Romans 11.28), they nonetheless became "disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy" (11.31-NIV).

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Hello Sab,

Your human example is a good one, and can be instructive since we are created in the image of God and certainly should reflect at least some residual of His perspective.

My question would be, what is the purpose of the paternal balance of love and discipline? Is it not corrective, curative and to bring about a positive result in our children.

I used to tell my three sons and daughter is was to make them into "right, upstanding citizens". Chastisement and correction was used in the process.

Likewise, I believe God's purpose is to bring about a positive result (not endless torture) in His children. "His arm is not short" nor is He slack in his ability to accomplish His purpose.

Well, your post assumes annihilation. It also assumes that annihilation is not part of God's "endtime" purpose and just something exclusive to our lives while on earth. That does not necessarily follow. Also, it is clear that God, Himself, foreknew the "falling away" of some while still on the journey to glorification (c.f. Rev. 3:5, 2 Peter 3:17, 1 Tim. 1:20, 2 Tim. 2:17, 2 Tim. 4:10, Heb. 6:6, Luke 8:13).

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by crakjak

Hello Sab,

Your human example is a good one, and can be instructive since we are created in the image of God and certainly should reflect at least some residual of His perspective.

My question would be, what is the purpose of the paternal balance of love and discipline? Is it not corrective, curative and to bring about a positive result in our children.

I used to tell my three sons and daughter is was to make them into "right, upstanding citizens". Chastisement and correction was used in the process.

Likewise, I believe God's purpose is to bring about a positive result (not endless torture) in His children. "His arm is not short" nor is He slack in his ability to accomplish His purpose.

What would you call it when a person has a limb removed because it cancerous and would destroy the rest of the body?

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

What would you call it when a person has a limb removed because it cancerous and would destroy the rest of the body?

I would call it a parable that Jesus used to describe the coming holocaust of Jerusalem and Judea in 70 AD. It was better for the believing Jews to enter into life of the New Covenant than to be cut off with the unbelievers and the Old Covenant.

Mark 9.49 "For everyone will be seasoned with fire..."

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

Well, your post assumes annihilation. It also assumes that annihilation is not part of God's "endtime" purpose and just something exclusive to our lives while on earth. That does not necessarily follow. Also, it is clear that God, Himself, foreknew the "falling away" of some while still on the journey to glorification (c.f. Rev. 3:5, 2 Peter 3:17, 1 Tim. 1:20, 2 Tim. 2:17, 2 Tim. 4:10, Heb. 6:6, Luke 8:13).

What is the meaning of "falling away"? There are many references as you have noted of folks "falling away". Also, why would an apostle turn someone over to satan for instruction? There is at least two such references in the epistles. I believe these are references of folks being chastised for correction.

[JN Anderson]

Originally Posted by crakjak

1. What is the meaning of "falling away"? There are many references as you have noted of folks "falling away".

2. Also, why would an apostle turn someone over to satan for instruction? There is at least two such references in the epistles. I believe these are references of folks being chastised for correction.

1. In the Heb. 6:6 passage the "fall away" there is parapipto which quite literally refers ones abandoning "a former relationship or association, or to dissociate" with. (1)

2. I believe, especially in the instance of 1 Tim. 1:20, that the turning over to satan was a disciplinary action in hopes of restoration and/or realization. This, however, does not suppose that all will heed or understand the discipline and return. Some will not because they left the Lord, their first love. Peter even speaks of those who arrogantly fell from their own "steadfastness", not realizing their ability to still sin and fall away from God.


Notes:

1. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament : Based on Semantic Domains, electronic ed. of the 2nd edition. (New York: United Bible societies, 1996, c1989). 1:448.

[JN Anderson]

Crakjak:

Passages such as Luke 3:6 (see below) do not affirm Universalism. In this passage, in particular, Luke is emphasizing the universal availability of the gospel--not the universal acceptance or impartation of such.


"And all flesh shall see the salvation of God." (Luke 3:6 NKJV)

[Neck]

Originally Posted by crakjak

I would not disagree with any of your statements, as stated. However, we cannot rightly attribute to God acts that defies love, and just say man can't understand.

Endless torture for any human is not holy, merciful, just or loving, therefore it cannot be true of God.

In faith we truly have to say without human intervention, God judges the sinner and God alone.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Sabellius

1. In the Heb. 6:6 passage the "fall away" there is parapipto which quite literally refers ones abandoning "a former relationship or association, or to dissociate" with.

Of course, this meaning does not preclude a restoration.

2. I believe, especially in the instance of 1 Tim. 1:20, that the turning over to satan was a disciplinary action in hopes of restoration and/or realization. This, however, does not suppose that all will heed or understand the discipline and return. Some will not because they left the Lord, their first love. Peter even speaks of those who arrogantly fell from their own "steadfastness", not realizing their ability to still sin and fall away from God.

The "turning one over to satan" gives us an idea of the extent to which God will go to bring those justified by his blood (all men) into right relationship. We all at one time or another "fall" from perfect relationship with our heavenly Father.