tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post1117787417290516650..comments2024-03-28T11:32:15.421-05:00Comments on <center>Istoria Ministries Article Archive</center>: Graced People Reap What They Have Not Sown; Lost People Reap What They Have SownWade Burlesonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01968442835088008681noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-44667202654640526862010-02-14T22:50:56.952-06:002010-02-14T22:50:56.952-06:00After some research and reflection, I remove my pr...After some research and reflection, I remove my previous objections to the term "substitutionary atonement" and place them on to the term "penal substitution." The former has a variety of interpretations - the latter seems to better represent what I have objected to.<br /><br />Just for the record! I won't go into it at the moment ("whew!" anybody left reading this is thinking...).<br /><br />thanks to everyone for the conversation,<br /><br />StevenSteven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-16822175637564310952010-02-14T22:32:15.871-06:002010-02-14T22:32:15.871-06:00Lydia,
I have read Colson's book Born Again. ...Lydia,<br /><br />I have read Colson's book Born Again. I enjoyed it very much. Thank you for relaying a very inspiring story. I am wondering if our legal system accepted the congressman's offer? I do not know. If so, I think that is quite remarkable. If not, then it's probably because the system would not accept that as justice.<br /><br />I think there is room to accept the idea of the substitutionary atonement as a beautiful marriage of justice and mercy, though it takes an interesting theodicy to do so - yet I still wonder if it is coherent. Still thinking on it, as always.<br /><br />I appreciate your appeal to love. But I still think that justice is only valid when it is the servant of love, not the other way around. <br /><br />"We are to repent and believe on Jesus Christ for eternal life."<br /><br />While I question the coherency of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, I usually accept it when arguing against the coherency of eternal hell and a loving God existing side by side. I should probably start making those arguments separately!<br /><br />thanks,<br /><br />StevenSteven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-68806554059754515782010-02-14T17:44:44.089-06:002010-02-14T17:44:44.089-06:00"God sacrifice himself to himself?
If a mur..."God sacrifice himself to himself? <br /><br />If a murder is done, no one would see justice as having been served if another person were allowed to do the jail time, and the killer was allowed to walk. "<br /><br />Steven,<br /><br />After the watergate scandal when Chuck Colson was sentenced, one of his bible study partners as a new believer, was a democrat congressman who was previously considered by Colson to be a political enemy, asked to be able to serve Colson's sentence for him since his family was falling apart.<br /><br />Why?<br /><br /><br />Love.<br /><br />God is PERFECT Justice. And because of that, God Himself, in the form of Jesus Christ, totally innocent and pure, took our punishment for us.<br /><br />We are to repent and believe on Jesus Christ for eternal life.Lydiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17367390474045060624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-7887749627097436712010-02-13T23:20:03.092-06:002010-02-13T23:20:03.092-06:00Hey Tom,
I keep thinking we will come to a stoppi...Hey Tom,<br /><br />I keep thinking we will come to a stopping place, but it's just a really interesting topic!<br /><br />"the doctrine of substitutionary atonement"<br /><br />God sacrifice himself to himself? <br /><br />If a murder is done, no one would see justice as having been served if another person were allowed to do the jail time, and the killer was allowed to walk. An innocent person sitting in jail does not satisfy justice - whether it be instructive punishment or mere retribution. <br /><br />But I will adopt the idea of the substitutionary atonement for the rest of my comment:<br /><br />"It doesn't seem to me to be such a horrible notion that a loving God would give people exactly what they want, even if what they want is not what is best for them."<br /><br />Can a person really, actually want what they think is not best for them? Interesting topic. I think people are deluded into thinking the wrong things are what is right for them. If we asked people, "do you want what is best for you?" wouldn't they all answer "yes" unless they were just being contrary in the moment?<br /><br />Also, if God is giving people "exactly what they want" then Hell is removed from the notion of punishment or retribution - since the sinner will not experience it as such, but rather as exactly what they want. An "eye for an eye" would not work if the offender actually wanted his eye to be plucked out all along.<br /><br />I also think the idea that some people prefer Hell and some people prefer Heaven MIGHT suggest a meritorious salvation - that "I am a saved child of God because of the preference for Him that I have chosen." Is salvation a partnership or is it 100% the work of God?<br /><br />The Christian Universalist marries these ideas well. God never shuts the door on a sinner, and eventually all hearts will turn to Him. His will will be done. But people are still responsible to make that choice. Yet given an infinite amount of time, and the unfailing love of God, no person could resist perfect goodness and love forever. As St. Augustine wrote, "Thou madest us for Thyself, and our heart is restless until it repose in Thee..."Steven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-16824256134028767762010-02-13T22:07:48.402-06:002010-02-13T22:07:48.402-06:00Steven,
Thanks! I'll try to stop by your blog ...Steven,<br />Thanks! I'll try to stop by your blog if I can think of anything else worthwhile to say. <br /><br />For now, I'll just note two things:<br /><br />(1) I see retribution as a good in itself, a matter of doing the right thing. My notion of justice is that a bad deed deserves a bad consequence. Mercy and compassion can and do exist alongside justice. In the case of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, the retributive aspect of justice (an eye for an eye) is met via Christ taking the punishment of others onto Himself, and mercy is met in God's choice to accept what He has done on our behalf, rather than requiring we ourselves be punished.<br /><br />(2) It doesn't seem to me to be such a horrible notion that a loving God would give people exactly what they want, even if what they want is not what is best for them. Perhaps He chooses to allow them to remain in that state because it most fits their desires and it most demonstrates His nature and character. <br /><br />Peace.Tom Kelleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07843658496931624572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-14366425684884772922010-02-13T20:48:10.052-06:002010-02-13T20:48:10.052-06:00Hi Tom,
"I think that pure retribution, with...Hi Tom,<br /><br />"I think that pure retribution, without regard to correction, is a valid aspect of both punishment and justice."<br /><br />I am curious how you make this work alongside the Christian ideas of forgiveness and mercy.<br /><br />I think "pure retribution" can only validly exist as a deterrent -in order to keep a society orderly. I am wondering what purpose "pure retribution"serves. It does not correct the initial wrong. If no positive effects are achieved through punishment, then the retribution only adds to the net wrong that has occurred. I guess this is a fancy way of saying "two wrongs don't make a right."<br /><br />" And sometimes the delusional are quite content with their delusions. :)"<br /><br />I suppose if you weren't, you wouldn't be delusional. But I agree, that we often choose the path of comfort over the path of greater overall happiness. The question is - if a person is delusional, does he have the power on his own to overcome the delusion? And if not, would a loving parent, or creator who certainly has the power, do something to intervene?<br /><br />I am going to post our conversation on my blog. I think it is really, really interesting. Thank you again!Steven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-13014777835144069432010-02-13T19:02:42.738-06:002010-02-13T19:02:42.738-06:00Steven,
Good comments. I guess we'll just have...Steven,<br />Good comments. I guess we'll just have to disagree about punishment -- I think that pure retribution, without regard to correction, is a valid aspect of both punishment and justice. <br /><br />And sometimes the delusional are quite content with their delusions. :)Tom Kelleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07843658496931624572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-27755297190083446892010-02-13T14:42:13.360-06:002010-02-13T14:42:13.360-06:00Tom,
I must differ with you on the view of punish...Tom,<br /><br />I must differ with you on the view of punishment. While I agree with you that punishment is about retribution, this only makes sense in the context of it being a deterrent. <br /><br />If a person murdered one close to me, yet I somehow knew that there was absolutely no chance of this person committing the same act again, and I also knew that the "deterrent effect" would have zero impact on other potential murderers, then there is no reason for punishment.<br /><br />If this violates something in my spirit, as it certainly would, I chalk it up to the human desire for revenge rather than for justice. Justice would be my loved one not having been murdered in the first place. But nothing changes that. And justice is not served by more suffering if there is no benefit to be derived from the suffering.<br /><br />Now, you might be thinking that there is another desire at play. The desire for the murderer to realize what he has done, to repent, to find remorse. This may be true as well, but this is punishment as instruction, with the hope of change for the better - which an eternal hell would not provide.<br /><br /><br />I can understand your idea of an "utterly corrupted" human. But if a person prefers suffering to "not suffering", which we see everyday here on earth, because it is in some sense what we are used to, what is comfortable - I associate this with delusion.<br /><br />I think your idea of "torment" is right on. We all know that feeling in different degrees. But when we experience that, when we blame our problems on someone else, we are delusional. It does not mean we are not accountable - we suffer for our delusions. <br /><br />But I cannot see it as merciful to leave a lost human to an eternity of delusion, when God would have the power to show the person love and joy, to clear the mind, to show the true nature of reality, to break the spell of the sinful nature.<br /><br />I want to see (or not see) some transparent aluminum!<br /><br />very good discussion,<br /><br />StevenSteven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-85540795668067182622010-02-13T10:40:53.560-06:002010-02-13T10:40:53.560-06:00Steven,
I don't know much about the true natur...Steven,<br />I don't know much about the true nature of hell (or heaven), having never been there. :) I do think they are separate places, and that there is a metaphorical aspect to descriptions of hell (such as "fire"), just as there are of heaven ("the street of the city was pure gold, transparent as glass" -- I've yet to see transparent gold, though I remember something called "transparent aluminum" from a Star Trek movie).<br /><br />But I'm not certain that punishment is always about correction or instruction. We send murderers to jail or to death not to teach or improve them, but to exact retribution. Their punishment is not a matter of making them a better person, but of settling the score, so to speak. That is central to the concept of justice -- that things weigh out.<br /><br />Also, I'm not so certain that the primary idea of hell is that of punishment, rather it seems to be more about torment. A person can be tormented by feelings of guilt, regret, remorse, hatred, revenge, etc. And a person can be tormented from within like that without desiring to change anything about themselves, but they blame all their problems and feelings on someone else. <br /><br />Could a person actually prefer hell? I think this goes back to what Wade said about how big a deal sin is. If sin has so utterly corrupted human nature as to make us truly believe that what is in reality evil is good, and what is in reality good is evil, then a person would only be following their nature and ultimate desire to want to be separated from God (which is what hell is ultimately all about). No amount of time would change their true nature, and taking such a person out of hell and placing them in heaven would be to that person a greater torment, and genuinely cruel.Tom Kelleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07843658496931624572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-27854138803194969322010-02-12T23:41:42.522-06:002010-02-12T23:41:42.522-06:00Tom Kelley,
Thanks for the words, I really apprec...Tom Kelley,<br /><br />Thanks for the words, I really appreciate them!<br /><br />I am familiar with the idea that perhaps some people would actually prefer Hell. It's like the idea that everyone actually goes to the same place, only some perceive it as Heaven and some perceive it as Hell. It is interesting, although it does take away from the idea that Hell is punishment.<br /><br />And the person who prefers Hell, if it is an unpleasant (or sadistically horrible) punishment would be quite delusional. <br /><br />Of course a Christian Universalist's idea of Hell is that fire and brimstone serve only two purposes - to change and to purify. Once again, punishment is only relevant if it instructs - if it makes better. If there is no hope of this, then punishment is pure sadism. <br /><br />Given an infinite amount of "time", surely everyone would eventually come to God. And if sinners are truly delusional, then God would surely break those chains.Steven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-59677229851626952262010-02-12T20:10:56.433-06:002010-02-12T20:10:56.433-06:00Steven Stark said...
3. I come back to this id...<i>Steven Stark said...<br /> 3. I come back to this idea. If everyone really understood the situation, then why would anyone reject Christ? It is incoherent - the action of one who is not of sound mind, or of one who does not have all the facts before him.</i><br /><br />Steven,<br />I've enjoyed reading your comments. I appreciate the clarity with which you present your thoughts and the respect you demonstrate to those who have different views. Very refreshing.<br /><br />Not to get into a lengthy point-by-point response to your comments (though it might be enjoyable to think through these things together), but I do have a thought on your question above. The only way in which I see it as coherent that anyone would choose hell over heaven (assuming they understood the significance of their choice, which is itself an interest point to consider) is if they would genuinely prefer hell. I'm reminded of the words of Lucifer in Milton's Paradise Lost, "It is better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven." <br /><br />My point is that, strange as it may sound, what if the nature of mankind is so corrupted by sin that our reason and affections are warped in such a way as to make us actually prefer to be separated from God for eternity? After all, if God is exactly as the Bible and Christian theology portrays Him, and that kind of God seems horrible and evil to those who do not know Him, would not those people perhaps actually prefer not to be around Him? Perhaps the most loving thing such a God could do with those who hate how He is and all He stands for would be to allow them to stay as far away from Him as possible. <br /><br />Just a thought.Tom Kelleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07843658496931624572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-31670777001017670142010-02-12T13:05:58.560-06:002010-02-12T13:05:58.560-06:00Wade,
"All understand and disobey their natu...Wade,<br /><br />"All understand and disobey their natural inclination to worship the Creator."<br /><br />From my conversations with atheists, I think this is false. There are good reasons not to believe (the problem of evil, examples of "unintelligent design", God's hiddenness, etc.). I personally feel that belief in God is a matter of taste, and the only reason to believe is whether you want to or not. Nothing logically compels us to believe. *note that I mean the traditional Western concept of God here.<br /><br />Your are suggesting that people do have the capability to understand the situation of salvation and damnation. Then why would they choose damnation, something fundamentally outside their own best interest? It's incoherent to think that they would, I think.<br /><br />Also, according to your view of God being "infinitely superior" to man - certainly this is a much greater distinction than the difference between a mentally handicapped person, or an infant, and an adult of sound mind. If we do not hold infants accountable to adult law, why should an God hold finite men accountable to infinite law?<br /><br />Kevin,<br /><br />Some responses:<br /><br /> 1. By whose dictate must God be worshiped? By his own. There are better ways to insure your own worship than by remaining relatively hidden and "catching" the non-believers after death. Why not appear in all your power and present them with their options? This would surely convert the entire world.<br /><br />Some suggest God does not do this out of respect and love for man and his freewill. Of course, this doesn't make sense if He then consigns people to Hell who did not realize it was that serious. This is not love. Love is rescuing someone from a dangerous situation, when they do not recognize the danger.<br /><br />2. A daily personal condemnation is no substitute for being held in condemnation against your will for eternity. <br /><br />3. I come back to this idea. If everyone really understood the situation, then why would anyone reject Christ? It is incoherent - the action of one who is not of sound mind, or of one who does not have all the facts before him.<br /><br />Thanks for a very enjoyable conversation!Steven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-4945166678688125432010-02-12T12:49:41.378-06:002010-02-12T12:49:41.378-06:00The problem with Hell is that, if it were to exist...The problem with Hell is that, if it were to exist, there would be no Heaven!<br /><br />I've actually written an entire book on this topic--Hell? No! Why You Can Be Certain There's No Such Place As Hell, (for anyone interested, you can get a free ecopy of Did Jesus Believe in Hell?, one of the most compelling chapters in my book at www.thereisnohell.com), but if I may, I'd like to share with you one of the many points I make in it to explain why.<br /><br />Let's say you end up in Heaven trying to sing endless praises to a God who is, simultaneously, torturing billions of others. Unless you are given a de facto lobotomy (in which case, YOU would no longer be YOU, so you might as well have not had a soul to begin with), you would have to begin wondering, "When am I next?" and the joy of Heaven would be lost, replaced by gloom and foreboding! Why? Because you could never rely on a God who is so mean to be honest about making any exceptions.<br /><br />After all, which is more difficult? For God to actively cause so much immense pain, for so many, for so long, or to go back on whatever promises he made to a few others that he would not put them in Hell too at some point?<br /><br />It would be like accepting an invitation to live as a guest with one of these maniacal men we've been hearing about lately who kidnap, imprison, rape and torture young girls in secret basements. Can you imagine such a guy, simultaneously, having some other young lady as his dinner date, and treating her with respect and care? And even if he did for a while, wouldn't his true nature unleash itself upon her at some point in time, as it has on so many others? Of course!<br /><br />So you can't really present any Good News if there's a Hell.<br /><br />But thankfully, there is good news after all: Jesus' original message tells us God intends to hurt no one, not for a second, much less for eternity.<br /><br />If one is willing to look, there's substantial evidence contained in the gospels to show that Jesus opposed the idea of Hell. For example, in Luke 9:51-56, is a story about his great disappointment with his disciples when they actually suggested imploring God to rain FIRE on a village just because they had rejected him. His response: "You don't know what spirit is inspiring this kind of talk!" Presumably, it was NOT the Holy Spirit. He went on, trying to explain how he had come to save, heal and relieve suffering, not be the CAUSE of it.<br /><br />So it only stands to reason that this same Jesus, who was appalled at the very idea of burning a few people, for a few horrific minutes until they were dead, could never, ever burn BILLIONS of people for an ETERNITY!<br /><br />True, there are a few statements that made their way into the copies of copies of copies of the gospel texts which place “Hell” on Jesus’ lips, but these adulterations came along many decades after his death, most likely due to the Church filling up with Greeks who imported their belief in Hades with them when they converted.<br /><br />Bear in mind that the historical Protestant doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures applies only to the original autographs, not the copies. But sadly, the interpolations that made their way into those copies have provided a convenient excuse for a lot of people to get around following Jesus’ real message.Rick Lannoyehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15771612313060169125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-32845291579388677322010-02-12T12:11:19.162-06:002010-02-12T12:11:19.162-06:00Steven,
Were a person truly unable to understand ...Steven,<br /><br />Were a person truly unable to understand (like an infant or the mentally incapicitated), I would agree with you wholeheartedly that hell seems unjust. <br /><br />But Romans 1 says that an understanding that there is an invisible and immortal God and that He is to be worshipped-- and not men or idols--is written in the conscience and heart of every human being. So it seems to me that the Bible is saying just the opposite.<br /><br />All understand and disobey their natural inclination to worship the Creator.<br /><br />Blessings,<br /><br />Wadewadeburleson.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09712009938843809657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-74191148143527981832010-02-12T07:37:40.025-06:002010-02-12T07:37:40.025-06:00Steven,
A few things:
1. Christ is not the esca...Steven, <br /><br />A few things:<br /><br />1. Christ is not the escape from hell. He is the eternal God who must be worshipped.<br /><br />2. Christians (those who are "regenerate") daily re-condemn themselves to everlasting punishment EVEN with the knowledge of the Word of God. The facts remains we still love our sins more than we love our God.<br /><br />3. "but God" (Ephesians 2:4) Best two words in all the Bible.<br /><br />KAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-4060726780683047202010-02-11T23:45:06.696-06:002010-02-11T23:45:06.696-06:00Thanks for those words, Wade.
Here are your premi...Thanks for those words, Wade.<br /><br />Here are your premises taken from two different comments:<br /><br />“I believe whosoever desires Christ is a recipient of the grace of God. In other words, nobody desiring the Lord is unrewarded!”<br /><br />“I can assure any sinner who asks that the punishment of hell, though just and according to deeds, is not something even the best of sinners would ever desire.”<br />(from a comment to Kevin)<br /><br />If no sinner would ever desire hell, then why would anyone reject Christ? <br /><br />There are only two reasons I can think of:<br /><br /> They do not understand what is going on.<br /><br /> They are not of sound mind.<br /><br />Can anyone add to this list? Remember we are assuming Wade’s premises that no sinner would ever desire hell. If this is true then, if presented with all the facts and a sound mind, every sinner would certainly accept Christ, who is the escape from hell.<br /><br />If a sinner goes to hell because of either reason I have listed, is this justice?<br /><br />Thanks!<br /><br />StevenSteven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-28426580154172026082010-02-11T23:07:30.406-06:002010-02-11T23:07:30.406-06:00Justin Taylor just linked to this blog article a f...Justin Taylor just linked to this blog article a few minutes ago on Facebook. <br /><br /><a href="http://andynaselli.com/theology/john-macarthur-on-how-to-serve-christians-who-are-needlessly-restrictive" rel="nofollow">http://andynaselli.com/theology/john-macarthur-on-how-to-serve-christians-who-are-needlessly-restrictive</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-71106079089710629822010-02-11T22:37:22.164-06:002010-02-11T22:37:22.164-06:00Kevin,
So I gather you listened to the message.
...Kevin,<br /><br />So I gather you listened to the message. <br /><br />Smile,<br /><br />Wade<br /><br />P.S. I can assure any sinner who asks that the punishment of hell, though just and according to deeds, is not something even the best of sinners would ever desire.wadeburleson.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09712009938843809657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-2183011419114423992010-02-11T22:31:55.712-06:002010-02-11T22:31:55.712-06:00Wade,
Dang nabbit!
However, I still take issue w...Wade,<br /><br />Dang nabbit!<br /><br />However, I still take issue with one line from the OP. And that is this: "For this reason, the person without faith in Christ would do well to live the most moral life possible--for he will one day reap what he has sown."<br /><br />I cannot find biblical evidence of this nor a practical need to even teach this. Is the sinner served by being "less sinful." Are not the hot fires of hell, and separation from the creator God sufficient and deserved by those who reject Christ?<br /><br />So while I recant my original claim of heresy to the sum total of your post, I find it hard to believe that you yourself would not see the heretical notion of telling the lost that rejecting Christ will be better if they just sin less. (Works based damnation?)<br /><br />I believe in damnation apart from any works at all--indeed apart from sin itself, for it is our sin nature which damns us to the eternal flame. No?<br /><br /><br />K<br /><br />PS: Thanks for the deal. You can consider yourself your best translator. ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-68887825837995872022010-02-11T22:25:57.951-06:002010-02-11T22:25:57.951-06:00Lydia,
I have to agree with you having to agree wi...Lydia,<br />I have to agree with you having to agree with Dr. Kear on this one.<br /><br />Concerning salvation, all our works are as filthy rags. We don’t deserve anything except as adopted children of God through the redeeming work of Jesus.<br /><br />We are not judged on our works for salvation, but as far as rewards; that’s a different story.<br /><br />Did Jesus tell the Sons of Thunder our rewards wound be the same and no one would sit on his left or right? No.<br /><br />“My Father has prepared those places for the ones he has chosen.” (Matthew 20:23) <br /><br />I believe our ‘rewards’ in heaven are not based on works but on love.<br /><br />Jesus said, “So which of them will love him more? Simon answered, “I suppose the one he forgave more. You have judged correctly.” (Luke 7: 42-43)<br /><br />Wade, on the above Scripture do you believe before Hitler killed himself, IF he had repented and sincerely asked Jesus to save him, he MIGHT be sitting on the right hand of Jesus?Rex Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06976501582240117188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-87997271034642876742010-02-11T21:26:58.788-06:002010-02-11T21:26:58.788-06:00Steven,
Good thoughts!
By the way, I want you to...Steven,<br /><br />Good thoughts!<br /><br />By the way, I want you to know that I believe whosoever desires Christ is a recipient of the grace of God. In other words, nobody desiring the Lord is unrewarded!<br /><br />Also, I admire your desire to protect the reputation of God. In any way that I have fallen short of presenting a loving, holy God whose justice is always and only perfect and right and love always and only unconditional, then I have failed in my communication.<br /><br />Wadewadeburleson.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09712009938843809657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-29961557855170119482010-02-11T20:51:35.072-06:002010-02-11T20:51:35.072-06:00Hi Wade - thanks for the response! I apologize fo...Hi Wade - thanks for the response! I apologize for the length below - I tried to keep each point as succinct as possible.<br /><br />“What makes the action of the man different is the nature of the one whom the man shot.”<br /><br />Motivations are not mentioned in your analogy. Why did the man shoot the deer? To leave the body to rot? If this were so, the hunter would be condemned. <br /><br />Is he shooting the deer because he cannot tolerate being close to deer, because they are inferior creatures - imperfect and dirty? The man would be condemned.<br /><br />This is the treatment God would be giving those who do not intellectually “embrace his Son”.<br /><br />Does the man decide to spare the deer, but something still has to get shot because deer are so bad, so he shoots himself? That is not a sane thing to do. But this is the idea of “substitutionary” atonement.<br /> <br /><br />If “holiness” does not include actions that we associate with love, then it has no meaning except “otherness” and “separateness”. Your argument for God is not that He is good, but rather that He is powerful.<br /><br />For instance, you mention sin against an infinite God. And that infinite punishment is appropriate. But this standard would be considered evil in our world. If a toddler commits a crime against an adult, we do not try the toddler as an adult. And surely, by your own ideas, God is much more far removed from us than a toddler is from an adult.<br /><br />Plus, I am guessing that your Calvinist theology includes the idea that ultimately God is the one who decides which hearts will accept him and which ones He will “harden.” Therefore God is effectively creating people who He knows will not accept Him. Therefore there is not even a legitimate offer being made here.<br /><br />Or if you accept freewill, then once again, God is allowing us to make decisions with infinite consequences with our finite minds, which is much worse than me giving a set of scissors to my 2 year old son and then respecting his decision to do what he will with them.<br /><br /><br />“It is possible that you see sin against Him as no big deal.”<br /><br /> I can think of no greater sin than condemning a person to an eternity of suffering without hope of reprieve. Punishment is only considered good if instructs, if it makes better, or if it acts as a deterrent. Hell does none of this. <br /><br />“If that's the case, then the cross of Christ loses its power and meaning.”<br /><br />I disagree with you here. If you don’t mind, I will change your phrase to a version that perhaps we can agree on - “If that’s the case, then the doctrine of substitutionary atonement loses its power and meaning.” Fair enough. <br /><br />Thanks for the thoughts!!<br /><br />StevenSteven Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677314285938844360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-46884931001920064072010-02-11T19:33:31.705-06:002010-02-11T19:33:31.705-06:00http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FOKbtXq-y0
The Ju...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FOKbtXq-y0<br /><br />The Judgment of God and the Great White Throne (Paul Washer)Lydiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17367390474045060624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-79617509449647673182010-02-11T18:56:08.260-06:002010-02-11T18:56:08.260-06:00Excellent post Wade....I concur hold heartedly.. W...Excellent post Wade....I concur hold heartedly.. Why else would martyrs be given a higher reign? These last few posts of yours are excellent in insight!G. Caseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11347794128375977943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19615457.post-45106935880792485472010-02-11T18:43:06.633-06:002010-02-11T18:43:06.633-06:00Debbie:
Some sure love to use that word heresy an...Debbie:<br /><br />Some sure love to use that word heresy and as you say maybe it is a good thing when someone accuses us of heresy to embrace it.<br /><br />Thanks for helping me to see heresy in a more positive light.Tom Parkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12861689101266081092noreply@blogger.com