[
Replying to post 101 by RightReason]
RightReason wrote:
[
Replying to shnarkle]
Dining with non believers doesn't save them. Ask Judas Iscariot.
I fully recognize the reasoning in assuming Judas was not saved,
I don't think you do.
but quite frankly even that is an assumption.
What you recognize hasn't been articulated by me so it would have to be an assumption.
Even the Church has never made a definitive statement about who specifically may be in hell,
This issue isn't who specifically is in hell, but the fact that there will be people in hell, and that they will be there according to God's will and plan of salvation.
because one – they simply don’t know and two it ignores the saving power of God’s grace.
Not at all. This isn't about God's ability. No one is disputing the omnipotence of God here; with or without his grace. The point is that God already knows the impact his grace is going to have on those he calls to conformity with his son and those he has "foreordained"; or "fitted" to destruction. It makes no sense to say that God foreordained some, but left the exact number up to chance, or that the rest aren't foreordained as that doesn't change the outcome. The point here isn't to negate free will, but to point out (as Paul so articulately did) that free will has nothing to do with the equation, e.g. "not by will or effort"
Who’s to say that someone at the very last second of their life, in God’s mercy, is showered with enough grace from Him that they repent and believe.
When one comes to salvation is also beside the point, but I'll entertain the question by answering it with Christ himself. He says: "Better that man were never born". Really? Why would that be? If Judas either pre-existed in heaven or died prior to birth, but now that he's born and betrayed the Lord of creation, he will now enter into his eternal reward at a lower seat at God's banquet than before, then to say that it would have been better that he was never born is to simply say that his eternal reward won't be as great. So what? That's not exactly something a gospel writer would have jotted down had they been operating under your assumptions.
Jesus isn't saying that he (i.e. Christ) is incapable of forgiving Judas here either. He isn't saying that Gods' grace can't save him. He's saying that God's grace will not save him. That soul willingly recieved Satan into his heart, and blashphemed the power and will of the Holy Spirit.
People tend to think that Judas was this guy who wanted to betray Jesus because he didn't believe what Jesus was saying. This is nonsense. Judas didn't understand God's plan of salvation, and in his ignorance decided to do it his way, rather than The Way. He wasn't supposed to "get it". He either knew Jesus was the messiah and was playing his part in the drama which to his way of thinking would have moved things along to a point where Jesus was crowned as king of Israel and the kingdom of messiah would have come into its own, or fell into disbelief because Jesus wasn't overthrowing the natural order for the advent of the kingdom. Either way he was wrong.
Either way, Jesus wasn't proclaiming the Natural order, or Natural Law as he plainly pointed out that if his kingdom were of the natural order, things would have turned out considerably different with an immense army there to defend and fight. That's not what Jesus is all about. That's not what the kingdom is all about.
It is the rich young ruler who walks away, not the disciple. Jesus loves everyone, but that doesn't mean that he's going to proclaim Natural Law, or go running after the rich dissapointed ruler and speak plainly to him so that he "gets it", and is saved. If he was supposed to get it, he'd get it.
I think you do not understand what is meant by Natural Law.
I understand perfectly what is meant by Natural Law.
Natural Law does not refer to the laws that exist by the state.
I never suggested they did[/quote]
Natural Law refers to the laws that apply to all men based on the design/order/facts of this world we live in and man’s relationship to this world we live in.
Got it. My point still stands as you are making a distinction with no effective difference. You are still basing it upon the created world, rather than the Creator. You are basing it upon the system of classification rather than on the one whe created the system. It is not the standard that determines, but One Who created the standard, and the pinacle of the created order is nowhere close to the pinacle of the Spiritual order which also doesn't determine right or wrong. It is not the law that judges. The law is an aid. It gives context, a framework, but it is not to be proclaimed.
God doesn’t harden them – they harden themselves.
Beside the point. The point remains that God will not interfere as that would go against his nature. He doesn't want automatons, nor is he looking for volunteers. Should you find this perplexing, one need only consult Paul's letter to the Romans to get a basic grasp of his doctrine of "election". This is God's election. We don't choose him, he chooses us. Again, don't misunderstand this fundamental tenet of God's system of justic. He is in no way impinging on our free will. Free will can have nothing to do with salvation as it would make Christ's sacrifice redundant. If I could choose to follow Natural Law or ANY law as a means to salvation, Christ's life would be pointless.
They do not want to serve Him and so God, knowing their definitive decision, gives them what they want.
Yep. He gives them exactly what they want. He doesn't sit up all night like some distraught mother of her teenage offspring pacing the floors wondering if they're going to come home or not; or come to salvation or not.
Scripture does not assert that God takes a reasonably righteous man and, out of the blue, hardens his heart, confuses his mind, or causes him (against his will) to become obstinate.
Right. The main reason being that no one is righteous to begin with. No one is even reasonably righteous. In a world of opposites, only God can be good, righteous, just, etc. The deal is already cemented when we're born in that not one single person in this whole world has the ability to save themselves. Not one person has the ability to even grasp the gospel or repent. If this were the case, there would be no point in Christ's life and sacrifice in the first place. Christ doesn't come to save the "reasonably righteous" either. He came to save the lost.
Quote:
“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.� -2 Peter 3:9
Great! So we can all sit back and do whatever we want to as God's desire and wishes alone are enough to get us to where we should be, right?
Not what I’m saying at all. You have created a straw man. [/quote]
No, I'm not. In regards to THIS discussion, you are assuming that God's patience and grace will result in "all" reaching repentance. If not, then you are assuming that God's grace is insufficient for "all" reaching repentance. It can't be insufficient. It can't be about God's power or grace. It can only be about God's will, and no one can thwart God's will. It doesn't matter what course one takes throughout their lives, if God wills that they be saved, they will be saved. Not one will be lost. This can't be about our ability either because Christ's sacrifice pays for those who are his. The good shepherd doesn't find the lost sheep and then ask them if they'd like to return to the sheepfold. He picks them up and takes them back for one and only one reason. They're HIS SHEEP, and he literally loves those sheep more than his own life, and he loves his father for giving them to him. There can be no amount of will or effort that can change wolves into sheep or tares into wheat. The good sheperd searches for his lost sheep, not his lost wolves. All wolves are lost and all wolves want nothing to do with the shepherd, and everything to do with the sheep.
The bible doesn't outlaw murder for nonbelievers. God's laws aren't directed at nonbelievers in the first place. Their adherence to the law is of no concern to God.
Again, you aren’t getting it. The Bible isn’t a list of “laws� for believers.[/quote]
I didn't say it was. The law is effectively irrelevant to those who are in Christ as one doesn't need the law when one isn't sinning or transgressing the law in the first place. The law doesn't keep them in line anymore because they have the love of Christ keeping them sinless. Those who are outside the law are irrelevant as they are destroyed outside the law, and those who are under the law are judged by the law. There is a big difference between being under the law and outside the law, but neither one comes anywhere near those who are in Christ. The proclamation of the bible is to proclaim Christ, not the law; not any law. Faith may establish the law, but it is the faith of Christ that is proclaimed, not the law.
The Bible has no choice but to proclaim the natural laws of the world created by God
Sorry, but the bible clearly articulates that we are not to place anything before God. There is no commission to proclaim natural law to the world. We do not fight against Natural Law, we fight against those spiritual powers in high places. This world is passing away, that's what you need to proclaim about natural law.
He reaches out to sinners, non believers, the possessed, etc.
True, and he does that through the crucifixion. He doesn't then jump down and give us the hard sell to bring us to salvation. The cross of Christ is all there really is. Some aren't supposed to "get it".
Quote:
Rather the Bible says it is wrong because the Bible cannot contradict the natural laws that govern us.
You're putting the cart before the horse. God doesn't create rocks too large for him to lift. This isn't a discussion on harmonizing the bible and natural law.
you do not understand what is meant by natural law. To not accept and acknowledge natural law is to not accept and acknowledge God, the creator of the world.
Non sequitur/False equivalence. We aren't denying Natural Law. I'm pointing out that you have no argument when you claim that the creation is to be proclaimed over the God Who created it.
One isn’t superior or inferior to the other – they are Truth.
You don't seem to understand that the bible makes it quite clear that there is the God of creation and there is everything that is created and never the twain shall meet under an umbrella of equality. There is none beside God. The Natural Law does not stand beside God. That which is flesh is flesh, and that which is spirit is spirit. And without the spirit you've got nothing.
Truth is truth – it has no ranking. It just IS.
Sure, but the truth is the way and the way is life and the life is of the spirit, not the natural law. The natural law will fade away, but the spirit is eternal. The natural law has boundaries that are not to be crossed, but that doesn't mean that they can't be crossed and when they do that soul will die because that soul never had life within them in the first place. God's purposes are manifold and there is no way the natural order will change to suit your tenets of salvation. You cannot violate the natural order in order to save anyone. More importantly, Natural Law can't save anyone either.
God's criteria of election isn't based upon our adherance or lack of adherance to Natural Law, or any law. It can't be based upon anything we do, as that would negate the promises of God. God doesn't promise to save everyone, therefore it makes no difference what anyone does until God saves them. He couldn't care less what anyone does until they're his found possession.
Barring salvation, I have no problem observing, maintaining, and upholding Natural Law, the Mosaic law, etc. This is the natural order and it should be upheld. However, for those who want to engage in their unique idea of a marriage, regardless of whether they will eventually be found of God or not; I won't be giving it any more of a thought than God does. For all practical intents and purposes I approve and condone through what I can only call a divine and superior indifference.