Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Jesus didn't want to save everyone?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    2 Peter 3:8[–9][,] New International Version (NIV):
    8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
    Thank you for including the name of the English Bible version for your citation.
    For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

    Comment


    • #77
      Charles’ Commentary

      "He has blinded their eyes
      and hardened their hearts,
      so they can neither see with their eyes,
      nor understand with their hearts,"


      God has blinded their eyes but somehow they can still see? He has hardened their hearts, but their hearts are still soft and somehow open to God? They can neither see nor understand, but yet they can somehow be held accountable for not being able to see or understand?

      You are yet to come up with a meaningful explanation of why this language is used about a free will situation in which a person could choose differently. The language and metaphors used give the opposite impression.


      On the face of it, the objection is reasonable, as is Christian3’s challenge (below).

      Citing Christian3
      So, God sends the Messiah Jesus to save mankind and then God hardens the hearts of corporate Israel so they will not accept Jesus' message???


      John is writing to a Jewish audience that is well-versed, or has ready access to people who are well-versed, in Hebrew concepts. The bare bones “He has blinded and hardened” will be sufficient for his purpose, as the audience will interpret the statement against a background of prior knowledge and understanding of the circumstances in which God does such things.


      Paul (Rom 11:5b-8), by contrast, is writing to a predominantly Gentile audience which can’t be expected to have in-depth knowledge and understanding, though it would be reasonable to expect that the audience does have access to people who do. Paul gives a slightly expanded view of the same subject, as part of an explanation of the function of grace. In this passage the people’s blindness (and deafness) are not directly imposed by God, but a condition arising from the stupor imposed by God. Nor would this stupor necessarily be a direct imposition – when God “gives” a negative condition, it is very much a matter of abandoning people to their choices.

      Neither passage provides an in-depth exposition of the circumstances that give rise to blinding and hardening by God’s action, so an investigation of the things that may give rise to such circumstances becomes advisable.

      That God will harden or blind a person (or people) is documented in the Old Testament record. With regard to Pharaoh, Exodus 7:3 foreshadows such action, which is enacted only after a few shots across the bow. Exodus 7:13; 8:15; 8:32 record Pharaoh hardening his own heart, culminating in God hardening Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 9:12). A summary of those events is given as salutatory warning to Israel (1 Samuel 6:6).
      Note: the English translation of Exodus 7:13 is usually flawed: with the nominative being “heart” and the verb being active, “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart” is incorrect – “Pharaoh’s heart hardened (or rather, “waxed strong”) is correct.

      Take the case of a lay-preacher who misunderstands a particular doctrine, to the point that his belief is diametrically opposed to the facts. So far, he is merely mistaken. Someone takes perhaps two hours to fully explain* the matter to the lay-preacher, who subsequently has a proper understanding. He nonetheless stands behind the pulpit a month or so later and propounds the inaccurate teaching. With that, and because of that, he puts himself in line for blinding and hardening.
      (*run through the relevant passages point by point without explaining them, but rather asking the questions that the points answer, and get the “student” to state the relevant passages’ answers)

      When God acts to make people blind or deaf, or harden their hearts, it is reactive rather than pro-active: a penalty (whether permanent or transitory) for transgressions committed. So, being accountable for the circumstances that gave rise to the imposition of blindness etc. “they can" indeed "somehow be held accountable for not being able to see or understand,” .
      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
      .
      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
      Scripture before Tradition:
      but that won't prevent others from
      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
      of the right to call yourself Christian.

      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
        Well, maybe you will subscribe to Origen's opinion?

        Source: Origen

        Sometimes it does not turn out to be an advantage for one to be healed quickly or superficially... Therefore God ... delays the healing of such persons and defers the remedy to a later time.

        © Copyright Original Source


        Or as Isaiah said "for how long, oh Lord?"

        Blessings,
        Lee
        Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to get across here. You're not giving me much context to work with.
        Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

        Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
        sigpic
        I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          How about you take a look at the part where God is speaking to Isaiah in a vision, and that the language throughout is metaphorical and not literal?

          Unless you're prepared to argue that an angel literally scalded Isaiah's lips with a red hot coal.

          I would say you're smarter than this, but I'm not convinced I would be speaking the truth.
          The text says nothing about scalding, and does not imply it. Isaiah was seeing a vision, & maybe things can happen in visions that cannot happen in “real life”. Seraphim (and their actions) do not belong to “real life” - they are real entities, but not real in a way that would satisfy a rationalist.

          Where is the metaphor in the chapter ? STM that everything in it can and should be “taken literally”.

          Comment

          widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
          Working...
          X