February 19, 2011
No Such Thing As A Person Who Wants To Be Saved But Is Not Chosen By God
There is no such thing as a person who truly wants to be saved yet is turned down by God. Every one who truly wants to be saved WILL BE SAVED, because only those chosen by God will truly want to be saved. Put another way, those who want to be saved are essentially already chosen by God, and their desire to be saved is evidence that they are chosen by God. We will never seek God if left to ourselves, apart from God's divine intervention in our lives. Those who choose to seek God do so because God first chose them and enabled them to seek Him (Ephesians 1:3-14; John 6:44,65; Romans 3:10-12). And whomever God chooses, that person WILL be saved all the way (John 6:37-38, Philippians 1:6). So there is no such thing as a person who naturally wants God if God didn't first choose that person, and there is no such thing as a person that God chooses who somehow doesn't make it to heaven, because whomever God chooses shall never be lost.
God Is Not Any Less Powerful or Worthy Just Because Some Are Not Saved
The fact that God chooses some but not others, the fact that not everyone is saved, the fact that suffering exists, the fact that God orchestrated so that Adam would choose sin, the fact that God orchestrates so that some people accept Jesus and others don't... none of that makes God any less powerful or any less worthy of worship. God is and has always been worthy. He chooses to do things for His glory, which is endless. It's not like He set out to save everyone and failed, or it's not like He set out to create a world without evil and failed. He set out to glorify Himself and He doesn't fail that. All of this contributes to His glory. We may not understand how exactly certain things contribute to His glory, and certain things may not come across well with some people. But God is the potter, and He is sovereign and can do whatever He wants. The good thing is that God does things that are righteous and just, and loving, and most of all, He consistently glorifies Himself, which is good because He is worthy of worship and if He cannot value such worthiness then His values are screwed up. He is not an evil God that chooses to do things out of malice, and He is not just bored and trying to amuse Himself, and He is not callous at the fact that some must perish, but He is a God that does things a certain way to glorify Himself, and those who find themselves among His flock are indeed to be in awe of the fact that God would choose us. God is not any less powerful just because certain people must perish. He could have made it that way so that nobody would have to perish, but for some reason the way that He did things results in greater glory.
God Actively Saves, Does Not Actively Condemn
So it seems unattractive that God would choose some and condemn other people... But this is not entirely accurate... The truth is that God is not an evil God that goes around choosing people to condemn. People, left to themselves in their sin, are already condemned, and they destroy themselves. It takes supernatural intervention to make salvation possible, whereas condemnation happens naturally from the natural order of things. God chooses to save people and actively saves them. He doesn't choose to actively condemn people. Yes the Bible says God prepares people for destruction to make His riches known to the people He prepared in advance for His glory (Romans 9), but the preparation done for those destined for destruction is a passive word whereas the preparation done for those destined for glory is an active word, in Greek. If this sounds like too subtle to make a difference, just talk to the people who argue about euthanasia. So God actively saves and lets others be condemned. Yes God does destroy those who are already condemned, in His righteous anger, but He does not actively condemn them. He may choose to harden those who are already condemned. Sin is indeed so terrible that it warrants condemnation... the wages of sin is death. If anyone thinks that sin is not so bad, just think about all the suffering... Suffering shows us how heinous our sin is. God does not necessarily inject suffering to teach us lessons. The suffering is a byproduct of our own sin. Destruction and death and ugliness come from ourselves and our sin.
God's Glory Is/Was Never Lacking
God doesn't need us to add to His glory. He is sufficient and glorious in and of Himself (the trinity). It's not like God lacked glory. God already had glory. But somehow you can always have more. You can keep adding to the glory and it would never end. That's why heaven is for eternity... there is no end. He didn't need humans in order to add to His glory because (1) He already had glory and (2) if He wanted to continue His glory He could have chosen something else. But He chose us, which makes it so marvelous. It's a bit paradoxical but the nature of glory is that God has already achieved glory and has always had glory, within the trinity but somehow God can continue to add to His glory... I'm still trying to understand this... whether it's like infinity plus infinity is still infinity...
I don't like the infinity argument because that frames the idea in quantitative terms. A better explanation is that God has always had infinite glory, but He chooses to magnify it through us (magnifying something does not change the fundamental nature of the thing being magnified). Or it is revealed more so through God's plan (meaning it's always been there).
I don't like the infinity argument because that frames the idea in quantitative terms. A better explanation is that God has always had infinite glory, but He chooses to magnify it through us (magnifying something does not change the fundamental nature of the thing being magnified). Or it is revealed more so through God's plan (meaning it's always been there).
It's About God's Glory, Not Our Salvation
God's goal is not to save every person but it is His glory. He is powerful enough to save everyone and powerful enough to not have anyone ever be fallen in the first place. He is powerful enough to eradicate all suffering and evil, and He is powerful enough to not have let suffering and evil exist in the first place. He is powerful enough to be glorious without wrath, and to have good without evil. But for some reason, His sovereign will made things this way for His own purposes and His own glory. For some reason He made us and His will made things transpire the way it did, for His glory. The fact that not everyone is saved does not somehow compromise God's power, sovereignty, and perfection. This begs the question... is God lacking in glory then such that He has to add to it? The answer is no God is not lacking...
Man's Free Will Can and Does Coexist With God's Sovereignty
People's will is a byproduct of their nature and their circumstances. So each person is freely making a choice, even though circumstances and personal disposition etc. may have had a bearing on that decision. Circumstances may be a factor when making decisions, but circumstances in and of themselves do not coerce or manipulate into choosing one way or other (for example, after 10 days of being lost in the wilderness and then being rescued and offered a nice meal, circumstances would seem to suggest that naturally, the person would jump at the opportunity to rejuvenate him/herself... but for various reasons, the person might choose otherwise... i.e. the person has grown to like being in survival mode and wants to go at it for longer, or maybe the person is mad about being rescued and is so mad he/she cannot eat or doesn't want to eat, or maybe the food was one of the foods he/she had bad memories of and therefore couldn't stand to eat it no matter how hungry they are, or maybe the person was overwhelmed by gratitude and had no appetite, or maybe the person really just wants to shower first and won't eat until after showering, or maybe the person's body metabolism really shut down and the person knows not to rush in solild foods but wants to request liquid foods due to his/her knowledge about his/her own body's reactions, etc.etc. ) . Point being, for a given situation and given circumstance, the circumstances alone do not dictate or force a person to a certain choice. Even in the face of grave adversity or hopelessness, when one thinks there's really no other choice but to give up and give in, some people still choose against what circumstances would dictate, or even when it seems to make the most sense to go this route that is a win-win situation, some people still choose to go the other way. So point being... man has free will in situations...
But of course God knows everything and in His sovereignty arranges things so that people choose a certain way... God knows how each person is wired (because He wired us!) and He knows how each person will react to a given situation... so effectively God arranges how things will turn out but it's still man that's making the free choice... And God is perfect so He doesn't make mistakes like He guessed this person would choose A when in fact the person chose B. God knows everything and doesn't guess the outcome but knows the outcome, and everything that transpires is according to His sovereignty, even if it seems like it doesn't make sense and we suspect that God was thwarted by man's will.
Adam's free will had the capacity to choose to sin or go towards God, but God did arrange so that Adam would choose to sin even though Adam could have chosen to be with God. God did it this way because somehow it resulted in greater glory. The rest of us have free will only in that we can choose to sin, or not, but we cannot in and of ourselves choose God. With the atonement of Jesus Christ, our options expand from sinning vs. not sinning, to include another choice, which is to choose to accept what Jesus did and accept Him as our savior. Any other choice is rejecting God. So just like Adam had free will, we have free will to choose God or not, with the external help of Jesus Christ's sacrifice. The difference is that Adam had the capability to choose God in and of himself, without Jesus, but the rest of us cannot choose God without going through Jesus.
Again, note that this free will we have does not make God inferior because God is still completely sovereign over the entire situation. He orchestrates things so that people choose a certain way, so humans cannot thwart God's will. God is all powerful and no human can thwart His will. We established this because the general man does not have free will that can trump God, since God is really still in control even though we exercise free will. God chooses us or does not choose us. We do not choose to accept or reject God without Him first choosing us.
And again, God could have arranged it so that Adam would not have chosen sin, but God didn't do it that way because somehow, doing it the way He did resulted in greater glory. As for the rest of us, yes, God could have arranged it so that, through the combination of how He created us and the lives He's placed us in, we would all end up choosing God through Jesus, but for some reason He didn't do it that way, because doing it the way He's doing it results in greater glory. I know this is a huge and difficult thing to accept... but one thing to keep in mind is that the ultimate goal of God is not to save everybody...
But of course God knows everything and in His sovereignty arranges things so that people choose a certain way... God knows how each person is wired (because He wired us!) and He knows how each person will react to a given situation... so effectively God arranges how things will turn out but it's still man that's making the free choice... And God is perfect so He doesn't make mistakes like He guessed this person would choose A when in fact the person chose B. God knows everything and doesn't guess the outcome but knows the outcome, and everything that transpires is according to His sovereignty, even if it seems like it doesn't make sense and we suspect that God was thwarted by man's will.
Adam's free will had the capacity to choose to sin or go towards God, but God did arrange so that Adam would choose to sin even though Adam could have chosen to be with God. God did it this way because somehow it resulted in greater glory. The rest of us have free will only in that we can choose to sin, or not, but we cannot in and of ourselves choose God. With the atonement of Jesus Christ, our options expand from sinning vs. not sinning, to include another choice, which is to choose to accept what Jesus did and accept Him as our savior. Any other choice is rejecting God. So just like Adam had free will, we have free will to choose God or not, with the external help of Jesus Christ's sacrifice. The difference is that Adam had the capability to choose God in and of himself, without Jesus, but the rest of us cannot choose God without going through Jesus.
Again, note that this free will we have does not make God inferior because God is still completely sovereign over the entire situation. He orchestrates things so that people choose a certain way, so humans cannot thwart God's will. God is all powerful and no human can thwart His will. We established this because the general man does not have free will that can trump God, since God is really still in control even though we exercise free will. God chooses us or does not choose us. We do not choose to accept or reject God without Him first choosing us.
And again, God could have arranged it so that Adam would not have chosen sin, but God didn't do it that way because somehow, doing it the way He did resulted in greater glory. As for the rest of us, yes, God could have arranged it so that, through the combination of how He created us and the lives He's placed us in, we would all end up choosing God through Jesus, but for some reason He didn't do it that way, because doing it the way He's doing it results in greater glory. I know this is a huge and difficult thing to accept... but one thing to keep in mind is that the ultimate goal of God is not to save everybody...
Free Will: Adam vs. Rest of Mankind
Regarding free will, Adam was the only man who had the free will to choose either way, to sin or to receive God's blessings. Adam was the only man who, in and of himself, could have chosen to be with God and truly be with God, without external forces like God's forgiveness etc. After the fall, all of us inherited a sin nature, and as a result of our sin we became unable to choose to be with God-- in and of ourselves, we are not capable of choosing God and receiving His blessings without external forces (i.e. God's forgiveness, sacrifice etc.). Adam had the free will to sin or the free will to choose God. The rest of mankind are sinners that only have the free will to sin but do not have the free will to choose to be with God in and of themselves. So we are talking about capability... all mankind still has free will, but the range and capability of Adam's free will was greater than ours. So here we establish that man, from Adam to us, has free will. Next we'll look at how this free will can coexist with God's sovereignty, i.e. man's will does not thwart God's will against God's wishes, but God doesn't control our will and make us robots either...
The Gospel Made Known Plainly To Those Whom God Chooses
God reveals the gospel plainly to those He chooses to reveal the gospel. To everyone else, it is confusing and even though they have eyes and ears, they cannot understand it. They cannot choose to understand it and receive it if God did not will it to be. The gospel is revealed today by the Word of God, carried by the Body of Christ (Christians, missionaries, churches, etc.). It's possible God may still reveal the gospel to people through visions etc. The gospel will be made plain and clear to those God decides to make it clear to... The truth is that God chooses us. We do not choose God without Him first choosing us. Interestingly, He still manages to give us free will even though God is ultimately in control (He doesn't just know what we'll choose and powerlessly watches and makes the most of man's decisions, but God is in control and essentially arranges things so that man, in his free will, will choose the choice that God intends... read on)...
No Other Gospel
God revealed His plan of salvation through people like Moses, and the prophets of the Old Testament, then through John the Baptist, and Jesus, and the apostles. The revelation of God'struth and how to follow Him is contained completely in the Bible. The Bible contains all the truthwe need to know, and there is no more truth to be dispensed beyond the end of the Bible (Jude 1:3, Revelation 22:18).
There is no other gospel (Galatians 1) besides the one God has given to us. God can and still does speak to people, but He will not reveal new truths. Those who claim that God spoke to them may be tested in that the content of their claims must be consistent with the Bible. God will not contradict the Bible. There is no new truth after Revelation, so whoever claims to have new truths/doctrine i.e. a new plan of salvation, or claiming additional material as new books to be as holy and authoritative as the Bible, and to add to what God already has given us is false. There is such thing as demons and false prophets and anti-Christs, and there is such thing as people who are simply and earnestly trying to be good and spiritual, so misleading prophecies and claims may come from demonic influences or may come from earnest morality and spirituality. None of these is from God unless it is consistent with scripture. There is only one gospel, and it is that we are sinners, that salvation comes by faith from God in Jesus Christ alone.
There is no other gospel (Galatians 1) besides the one God has given to us. God can and still does speak to people, but He will not reveal new truths. Those who claim that God spoke to them may be tested in that the content of their claims must be consistent with the Bible. God will not contradict the Bible. There is no new truth after Revelation, so whoever claims to have new truths/doctrine i.e. a new plan of salvation, or claiming additional material as new books to be as holy and authoritative as the Bible, and to add to what God already has given us is false. There is such thing as demons and false prophets and anti-Christs, and there is such thing as people who are simply and earnestly trying to be good and spiritual, so misleading prophecies and claims may come from demonic influences or may come from earnest morality and spirituality. None of these is from God unless it is consistent with scripture. There is only one gospel, and it is that we are sinners, that salvation comes by faith from God in Jesus Christ alone.
God's Revelation Through Creation
Creation is intended to show us that God exists and for us to seek Him. God's revelation through creation, in and of itself, is not sufficient for salvation (the redemptive plan of salvation is only found through Jesus). The revelation of God through creation has been made plainly to all, though, such that no one can use the excuse that they didn't know God exists and didn't know they were to seek Him. (Acts 17:24-28)
The Bible Is God-Breathed
As for the Bible being the source of truth, the Bible is God-breathed in that God breathed out His words to us, as opposed to people wrote down some words and God breathed on those words to give those words his endorsement. It's seems to be a subtle difference, but it makes a world of difference because the former is infallible but the latter is not. Moses was not there during Genesis but it was God who gave these truths to Moses. The Bible is directly from God and it is believable that God can communicate this to us through various individuals because if God really exists, He can do anything. He can raise people from the dead, and He can certainly see to it that His truth is communicated to us in the form of a Bible even if some of the authors weren't eyewitnesses. As far as the books that are included in the Bible, there was an entire process by which the books in the Bible were chosen, and certain other ones not included. All of the Bible is from God, written by the people God spoke directly to or close associates of those people. It is true that the Old Testament should not be read with the intent of following all of it down to the letter, because none of those laws apply anymore, since we have been given a New Covenant through Jesus, which frees us from that law.
For sure there are copyist errors. If we start with one copy, let's say they copied it 4 times to distribute it to the north, east, south, and west. Then in each of those places, they make four more copies to distribute again to the north, east, south, and west, and so on. During this multiplication of copies, somebody may have missed say a word in the fifth generation of copies, but that word should be there in the third generation. That's why we compile and look at as many manuscripts as possible to verify and validate the text. In this sense, the Bible is the most accurately transmitted document; it has the most manuscripts and fragments from various geographic regions, which together reconstruct the same, repeated information and ascertain its reliability. To reject this, one would have to reject all the other ancient texts because none of those come close to the transmission accuracy of the Bible.
As far as malicious tampering of the contents of the Bible, let's say there were an evil person who wanted to alter some part of the Bible. That evil person would have to make sure to go to the north, south, east, west, and everywhere else the copying was being done... Probably not possible (evil person argument thanks to M. Slick).
For sure there are copyist errors. If we start with one copy, let's say they copied it 4 times to distribute it to the north, east, south, and west. Then in each of those places, they make four more copies to distribute again to the north, east, south, and west, and so on. During this multiplication of copies, somebody may have missed say a word in the fifth generation of copies, but that word should be there in the third generation. That's why we compile and look at as many manuscripts as possible to verify and validate the text. In this sense, the Bible is the most accurately transmitted document; it has the most manuscripts and fragments from various geographic regions, which together reconstruct the same, repeated information and ascertain its reliability. To reject this, one would have to reject all the other ancient texts because none of those come close to the transmission accuracy of the Bible.
As far as malicious tampering of the contents of the Bible, let's say there were an evil person who wanted to alter some part of the Bible. That evil person would have to make sure to go to the north, south, east, west, and everywhere else the copying was being done... Probably not possible (evil person argument thanks to M. Slick).
Suffering Is Not Fair
For sure human suffering is not fair. Just think Job. The present world is ruled by the prince of this world, who is Satan (Ephesians 2:2, 2 Corinthians 4:4). But remember that God is greater than evil and everything is still under God's control and sovereignty. And yes for sure God is the source of light and hope in the darkness of suffering. Suffering does play a role in God's plan. It's not all aimless suffering but it can sanctify and grow us, and our present afflications do not compare with the glory that awaits those who belong to God's family. Having this hope does not necessarily make things easy and happy, but God does promise peace and to be our refuge.
Babies and Children
We understand that nobody has an excuse when it comes to being exempt from the law and the consequences of the law (sin and death), and that God can and does reveal Himself in various ways to various people over the course of human history so that man can have faith and be saved. What about babies and children? If they die, are they condemned?
So Adam was the only human who truly had free will. Adam had the capacity to sin, and he chose to sin, and as a result, all of humanity inherited this nature of sin. We are all born with this sin nature (capacity and propensity to sin), but we are judged by our sin (act of sin, commiting sin), not judged merely by our nature to sin. There is no sin without the law (the law uncovers and reveals sin; see Romans 3:20), and there comes a time in a person's life when the feeling of conviction, the notion of doing right/wrong, feeling guilty, etc. come into being. That is basically the law written in our hearts. Once we reach that point in time, we are held accountable to it and will be judged by it. And everybody will basically fall short of perfection, sin, and be subject to the wages of sin which is death. I don't think there is a concrete age but rather the age is probably different on a case by case basis. Whatever that time is, if that person dies prior to that point in time, God will not condemn the person because he/she is not guilty of sin yet, since he/she has no notion of the law yet. No law --> no sin --> no judgment. I would argue that the only people who aren't subject to the law (and therefore not held accountable for their sin) are those like these babies/children. Every other person who has ever existed on earth and will exist in the future WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR SINS (and the wages of sin is death), including the person who existed before Jesus and including the person on a remote island.
Here is a link with some more info on this: http://www.
So Adam was the only human who truly had free will. Adam had the capacity to sin, and he chose to sin, and as a result, all of humanity inherited this nature of sin. We are all born with this sin nature (capacity and propensity to sin), but we are judged by our sin (act of sin, commiting sin), not judged merely by our nature to sin. There is no sin without the law (the law uncovers and reveals sin; see Romans 3:20), and there comes a time in a person's life when the feeling of conviction, the notion of doing right/wrong, feeling guilty, etc. come into being. That is basically the law written in our hearts. Once we reach that point in time, we are held accountable to it and will be judged by it. And everybody will basically fall short of perfection, sin, and be subject to the wages of sin which is death. I don't think there is a concrete age but rather the age is probably different on a case by case basis. Whatever that time is, if that person dies prior to that point in time, God will not condemn the person because he/she is not guilty of sin yet, since he/she has no notion of the law yet. No law --> no sin --> no judgment. I would argue that the only people who aren't subject to the law (and therefore not held accountable for their sin) are those like these babies/children. Every other person who has ever existed on earth and will exist in the future WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR SINS (and the wages of sin is death), including the person who existed before Jesus and including the person on a remote island.
Here is a link with some more info on this: http://www.
Salvation In Spite Of Circumstances
As far as being saved, it's entirely possible that, in spite of lack of access to the Bible and the gospel bearers, God revealed Himself to these remote people, who then may have faith and be saved. It's also entirely possible that God did NOT reveal Himself to some or all of these people, and then these people without faith would essentially be condemned. I tend to think that if this were the case, whomever God did not reveal Himself to and seemingly didn't give the opportunity to accept or reject His truth... I tend to think that these people would have rejected the truth anyway, had they actually been given the opportunity to be exposed to it. I don't think God makes mistakes like that, where He accidentally lets somebody be born in some remote island and end up condemned when that person would have actually believed had he/she grown up in another situation. God is all-knowing and pretty much knows where each person will end up, so if He knows that Mr. X is going to be among his flock, among His own children, God could will it so that this person grows up in a Christian home and accepts the truth, or God could will it so that this person grows up in the slums and is evangelized to, or God could will it so that this person is in some remote village or island and is evangelized to, or God could will it that this person never gets evangelized to but sees God reveal Himself through visions, etc. One way or other, God's will is sovereign. God's will is NOT thwarted by circumstances.Even in the most unlikely of places that one would imagine the gospel being shared, God could reveal Himself in whatever way He sees fit.
As far as circumstances and opportunities to be exposed to the gospel or the truth being preached... I don't think there is unfairness because no matter the situation, the situation cannot trump God's will. So for opportunities to hear the truth and be saved... I don't believe there is unfairness in one's circumstances and plight. Of course if we are talking about the circumstances and the situations themselves, in and of themselves, of course things are not fair (one person is born in poverty and the slums, and another into a wealthy family; one person dies an untimely and tragic death whereas another does not; or think of Job... some people have a lot of suffering and tribulation in their lives while others do not). Also, if we are talking about the idea that some people end up being saved and others not, that God would save some but not others, yes that is also unfair (of course if God wanted to be fair about that, He would save no one). Thus circumstances themselves, and predestination itself, are unfair. But if we are talking about people not given the chance to believe or given the opportunity to believe due to circumstances, I don't think there is a case, because circumstances are not greater than God. If it's in God's plan to give that person on the remote island a chance to know the truth and be saved, God could and would easily overcome that person's circumstance, and show Himself to that person, even though there may be no Bible ever heard of in that village. So this basically covers all the people who may have never been exposed to the gospel and Bible, and this also covers people who existed before the Bible, i.e. the caveman etc.
As far as circumstances and opportunities to be exposed to the gospel or the truth being preached... I don't think there is unfairness because no matter the situation, the situation cannot trump God's will. So for opportunities to hear the truth and be saved... I don't believe there is unfairness in one's circumstances and plight. Of course if we are talking about the circumstances and the situations themselves, in and of themselves, of course things are not fair (one person is born in poverty and the slums, and another into a wealthy family; one person dies an untimely and tragic death whereas another does not; or think of Job... some people have a lot of suffering and tribulation in their lives while others do not). Also, if we are talking about the idea that some people end up being saved and others not, that God would save some but not others, yes that is also unfair (of course if God wanted to be fair about that, He would save no one). Thus circumstances themselves, and predestination itself, are unfair. But if we are talking about people not given the chance to believe or given the opportunity to believe due to circumstances, I don't think there is a case, because circumstances are not greater than God. If it's in God's plan to give that person on the remote island a chance to know the truth and be saved, God could and would easily overcome that person's circumstance, and show Himself to that person, even though there may be no Bible ever heard of in that village. So this basically covers all the people who may have never been exposed to the gospel and Bible, and this also covers people who existed before the Bible, i.e. the caveman etc.
February 18, 2011
Without Excuse
As for those who have NOT been exposed to the written laws of the Old Testament and the New Testament (like those on some remote island or village untouched by apostles or prophets or missionaries), does this mean that those people are not held accountable or condemned for what they don't know? NO. Paul argues in Romans 1-2 that essentially people who are not exposed to the written law still have a law that's ingrained in them, that is "written on their hearts" by God, and they know whether they are doing wrong by their conscience (Romans 2:14). So these people who aren't exposed to and have never heard of the Bible, still have a law, which exposes their sin and therefore condemns them, because the wages of sin is death. So these people are without excuse... they are not exempt from the law and the consequences of the law (sin and death). But even if these people follow this law written on their hearts, that is not going to get them saved. Furthermore, Romans 1:18-20 says that God revealed Himself plainly to people (including people who've never heard of the Bible), by showing Himself through creation... so nobody can give the excuse that they never knew about God.
So how are these isolated people saved? In the same way as the people of the OT and people today... through faith in God's revelations of truth to them and if they have faith in these revelations of God's truth. It's not inconceivable that God could and would reveal Himself and His truth to some remote people and show them all the truths that He's shown to people throughout history (see the previous post for more details and Biblical support of what God revealed to different people from the past).
So how are these isolated people saved? In the same way as the people of the OT and people today... through faith in God's revelations of truth to them and if they have faith in these revelations of God's truth. It's not inconceivable that God could and would reveal Himself and His truth to some remote people and show them all the truths that He's shown to people throughout history (see the previous post for more details and Biblical support of what God revealed to different people from the past).
Salvation For Those Before Jesus' Time
It's still by faith alone in Christ alone. Here's how: click me
Notes From Who Cares? Retreat
From 9/2009 (E. Liao)
- It's okay to strive for greatness.
- Feeling bad is not enough. I must be reminded of God's mercy & grace and be compelled to show it to others for God's sake (not out of guilt etc.).
- Mercy = we didn't get the punishment we deserve
- Grace = we got rewards we don't deserve
- Don't ask for more patience, generosity, less jealousy, etc. but ask for more heart (ask for a change in myself rather than strength to deal with others).
- Show love to others because we owe it to God (not that person). See that person as an image of God.
- Don't feel compelled to set the record straight or let it be known that I'm doing this for God (because that means I don't trust God, that I believe they'll never learn without my telling them). Do it only if it's a sin issue, and even then, in a tactful way.
- When we pray for God to keep us from evil, it's usually for protection against committing evil, but the biggest problem in my marriage, job, church, etc. is ME.
- If I only had 3 months to live, would I love differently? The answer should be no. It doesn't necessarily mean to drop everything and evangelize. It's not necessarily about getting the most people to salvation but cimply about doing what God wants, which could include loving those already saved. One way or other, it's about doing what He wants, for His sake, because we owe it to Him.
- It's okay to strive for greatness.
- Feeling bad is not enough. I must be reminded of God's mercy & grace and be compelled to show it to others for God's sake (not out of guilt etc.).
- Mercy = we didn't get the punishment we deserve
- Grace = we got rewards we don't deserve
- Don't ask for more patience, generosity, less jealousy, etc. but ask for more heart (ask for a change in myself rather than strength to deal with others).
- Show love to others because we owe it to God (not that person). See that person as an image of God.
- Don't feel compelled to set the record straight or let it be known that I'm doing this for God (because that means I don't trust God, that I believe they'll never learn without my telling them). Do it only if it's a sin issue, and even then, in a tactful way.
- When we pray for God to keep us from evil, it's usually for protection against committing evil, but the biggest problem in my marriage, job, church, etc. is ME.
- If I only had 3 months to live, would I love differently? The answer should be no. It doesn't necessarily mean to drop everything and evangelize. It's not necessarily about getting the most people to salvation but cimply about doing what God wants, which could include loving those already saved. One way or other, it's about doing what He wants, for His sake, because we owe it to Him.
Does God Get Tired or Have Regrets?
From 7/13/2009
Genesis 6:3,5-7
Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” ... The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the LORD said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
Question: Did God get tired? Why did He have to "contend" with humans?
Answer: This is not that great of a translation. A better translation would say that God will not remain with man forever, for they are corrupt, and that He decided to give these particular people 120 more years to repent, before the flood comes and judgment occurs (see this). God merely accelerated judgment. (In the meantime, there's still common/deferred grace because death doesn't come to us right away.)
Question: Did God actually regret his decision? (If so then there are huge flaws to God's perfection and omniscience.)
Answer: It's possible to know something yet still feel sad about it. So it's not really "regret" in the sense that God made a mistake, but "regret" in that He's sad about it. Example... if you get a letter of rejection, it says that "we regret to inform you that blah blah blah" and it's talking about how they are sad to tell you that you're rejected, but it's not like they regret their decision in the sense that they believe they made a mistake.
Genesis 6:3,5-7
Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” ... The LORD saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The LORD regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the LORD said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”
Question: Did God get tired? Why did He have to "contend" with humans?
Answer: This is not that great of a translation. A better translation would say that God will not remain with man forever, for they are corrupt, and that He decided to give these particular people 120 more years to repent, before the flood comes and judgment occurs (see this). God merely accelerated judgment. (In the meantime, there's still common/deferred grace because death doesn't come to us right away.)
Question: Did God actually regret his decision? (If so then there are huge flaws to God's perfection and omniscience.)
Answer: It's possible to know something yet still feel sad about it. So it's not really "regret" in the sense that God made a mistake, but "regret" in that He's sad about it. Example... if you get a letter of rejection, it says that "we regret to inform you that blah blah blah" and it's talking about how they are sad to tell you that you're rejected, but it's not like they regret their decision in the sense that they believe they made a mistake.
The Nephilim
From 7/13/2009
Genesis 6:1-2,4
When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.... The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
SONS OF GOD <== ANGELS
The phrase "sons of God" only appears in this context as well as in Job and refers to angels.
5 COMMON VIEWS on the NEPHILIM
(1) hybrid offspring of fallen angels and human women
(2) offspring of descendants of Seth with those of Cain
(3) giant, champion, strong men
(4) hero
(5) not historical figures but just ancient mythology
Genesis 6:1-2,4
When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.... The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
SONS OF GOD <== ANGELS
The phrase "sons of God" only appears in this context as well as in Job and refers to angels.
5 COMMON VIEWS on the NEPHILIM
(1) hybrid offspring of fallen angels and human women
(2) offspring of descendants of Seth with those of Cain
(3) giant, champion, strong men
(4) hero
(5) not historical figures but just ancient mythology
Enoch lived 365 years... Coincidence?
From 7/13/2009
Genesis 5:23-24
Altogether, Enoch lived a total of 365 years. Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.
Coincidence that there are 365 days in a year? Most likely. Most Google hits delve into theories on when rapture will occur but the Bible clearly says no man knows the day or hour of the Second Coming, except for the Father (Mark 13:32).
Genesis 5:23-24
Altogether, Enoch lived a total of 365 years. Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.
Coincidence that there are 365 days in a year? Most likely. Most Google hits delve into theories on when rapture will occur but the Bible clearly says no man knows the day or hour of the Second Coming, except for the Father (Mark 13:32).
Cain and Lamech To Be Avenged?
From 7/13/2009
Genesis 4:15 -- Why would the Lord protect Cain from death? ==> This is an example of God mingling justice with mercy. The justice is that Cain is under a curse and will be exiled, but the mercy is that God reassured Cain in his fears of retaliation that God would put a mark on Cain that protects him from being killed.
Genesis 4:24 -- Why would the Lord protect Lamech from death? ==> He didn't. This was just Lamech taking God's words for his own use, to justify his own actions (he just killed a man).
For more info, see here.
Genesis 4:15 -- Why would the Lord protect Cain from death? ==> This is an example of God mingling justice with mercy. The justice is that Cain is under a curse and will be exiled, but the mercy is that God reassured Cain in his fears of retaliation that God would put a mark on Cain that protects him from being killed.
Genesis 4:24 -- Why would the Lord protect Lamech from death? ==> He didn't. This was just Lamech taking God's words for his own use, to justify his own actions (he just killed a man).
For more info, see here.
Absurdity of Creating One's Own Reality
Quoted from The Glory of Heaven (J. MacArthur):
THE ASSERTION
- "we create our own surroundings by the thoughts we think"
- "truth and reality and subjective, unique to every individual"
- "All our 'surroundings' ... are merely the product of our thoughts"
IMPLICATIONS
"The moral effects of such relativism are abominble. This means, for example, that people afflicted with illnesses and disabilities are viewed as having brought these things upon themselves.... This has the effect of trivializing human suffering and absolving the Nazi butchers of their crimes." D. Groothuis is quoted as having written, "If the Holocaust victims were not really victims at all but willing participants, then the Nazis should not have been morally condemned; they were simply enacting the wishes of their subjects. Surely, this is morally absurd."
THE ASSERTION
- "we create our own surroundings by the thoughts we think"
- "truth and reality and subjective, unique to every individual"
- "All our 'surroundings' ... are merely the product of our thoughts"
IMPLICATIONS
"The moral effects of such relativism are abominble. This means, for example, that people afflicted with illnesses and disabilities are viewed as having brought these things upon themselves.... This has the effect of trivializing human suffering and absolving the Nazi butchers of their crimes." D. Groothuis is quoted as having written, "If the Holocaust victims were not really victims at all but willing participants, then the Nazis should not have been morally condemned; they were simply enacting the wishes of their subjects. Surely, this is morally absurd."
Limited Atonement
From CARM podcast 1/18/2011:
THE ASSERTION
Jesus died for every last person, not just the elect.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
If Jesus died for all, then no one would go to hell, since every single person's death sentence would already have been paid for. But people still go to hell.
QUALIFIED ASSERTION
Well the penalty's been paid for but it's up to the person to accept it before it takes effect.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
Um no... Consider this analogy: A man is on his way to the bank to pay off his mortgage. On the way to the bank, he suddenly gets into an accident and falls into a coma, and stays in the hospital for several months. Later, he comes out of the coma, recovers, and goes to the bank again to pay off the mortgage. At the bank, he gives his check to the the bank teller, who looks up his mortgage info and then proceeds to tell him that some anonymous philanthropist has come in during his time in the hospital and paid off the entire mortgage. There is no more debt against the man; he owes nothing. It doesn't matter whether he accepts or believes that a benefactor did this or not. The fact of the matter is that there is no debt anymore. It is a legal thing, not subject to one's belief or not. So... if Jesus already died and paid off everyone's debt of sin, then why would it be up to us to accept it before it takes effect? Absurd...
THE ASSERTION
Jesus died for every last person, not just the elect.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
If Jesus died for all, then no one would go to hell, since every single person's death sentence would already have been paid for. But people still go to hell.
QUALIFIED ASSERTION
Well the penalty's been paid for but it's up to the person to accept it before it takes effect.
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
Um no... Consider this analogy: A man is on his way to the bank to pay off his mortgage. On the way to the bank, he suddenly gets into an accident and falls into a coma, and stays in the hospital for several months. Later, he comes out of the coma, recovers, and goes to the bank again to pay off the mortgage. At the bank, he gives his check to the the bank teller, who looks up his mortgage info and then proceeds to tell him that some anonymous philanthropist has come in during his time in the hospital and paid off the entire mortgage. There is no more debt against the man; he owes nothing. It doesn't matter whether he accepts or believes that a benefactor did this or not. The fact of the matter is that there is no debt anymore. It is a legal thing, not subject to one's belief or not. So... if Jesus already died and paid off everyone's debt of sin, then why would it be up to us to accept it before it takes effect? Absurd...
February 17, 2011
Cain : Abel :: Esau : Jacob ?
From 7/13/2009 (~Genesis 4)
QUESTION
Regarding Cain's offering < Abel's offering: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it"... Is "doing right" related to God's arbitrary favor, i.e. Cain and Esau were not "doing right"? (Abel vs. Cain, Jacob vs. Esau).
ANSWER
For Cain and Abel, Abel had more faith (Hebrews 11). This is different from Jacob and Esau, which deals with God's sovereign plan.
TANGENT
Jacob schemed b/c he didn't believe God could do what God said (bless him) so he manipulated to get it. But this caused strife w/ Esau and in general... Eventually Jacob wrestled with God until Jacob said "bless me" which is what God wanted to hear him ask.
QUESTION
Regarding Cain's offering < Abel's offering: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it"... Is "doing right" related to God's arbitrary favor, i.e. Cain and Esau were not "doing right"? (Abel vs. Cain, Jacob vs. Esau).
ANSWER
For Cain and Abel, Abel had more faith (Hebrews 11). This is different from Jacob and Esau, which deals with God's sovereign plan.
TANGENT
Jacob schemed b/c he didn't believe God could do what God said (bless him) so he manipulated to get it. But this caused strife w/ Esau and in general... Eventually Jacob wrestled with God until Jacob said "bless me" which is what God wanted to hear him ask.
Tidbit on Free Will
From 7/13/2009
- Adam & Eve had free will, subject to God's knowledge.
- The rest of us were born as sinners.
- Adam & Eve had free will, subject to God's knowledge.
- The rest of us were born as sinners.
Notes on Genesis 3 (The Fall)
From 6/24/2009
- The serpent is Lucifer taking on physical form (see Rev 20:2).
- Chapter 3 is to be taken literally.
- Why does God talk to us even though He knows how we'll respond? For our benefit of realizing we did wrong? For His desire to interact with us? This is an anthropomorphic interpretation of God which helps us understand God as personable.
- What is "enmity between you [serpent] and the woman"? Basically bad vs. good people
- Crushing the serpent's head <== this is fulfilled over the course of the NT
- Serpent striking Jesus' heel <== crucifixion is Satan's attempt to attack
- Woman's desire will be for her husband but he will rule over her <== "desire" is same as in Genesis 4:7 and implies control (I desire to control husband but he rules so we fight)
- Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil : brings death :: The Law : brings death (see Paul in Romans 7)
- Not supposed to find life through the law, but there's the TREE OF LIFE which is a pre-metaphor for Jesus (the only tree to show up in Rev)
- The serpent is Lucifer taking on physical form (see Rev 20:2).
- Chapter 3 is to be taken literally.
- Why does God talk to us even though He knows how we'll respond? For our benefit of realizing we did wrong? For His desire to interact with us? This is an anthropomorphic interpretation of God which helps us understand God as personable.
- What is "enmity between you [serpent] and the woman"? Basically bad vs. good people
- Crushing the serpent's head <== this is fulfilled over the course of the NT
- Serpent striking Jesus' heel <== crucifixion is Satan's attempt to attack
- Woman's desire will be for her husband but he will rule over her <== "desire" is same as in Genesis 4:7 and implies control (I desire to control husband but he rules so we fight)
- Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil : brings death :: The Law : brings death (see Paul in Romans 7)
- Not supposed to find life through the law, but there's the TREE OF LIFE which is a pre-metaphor for Jesus (the only tree to show up in Rev)
February 6, 2011
Notes on Some Denominations
From 12/19/2008 (K. Lai)
PRESBYTERIAN
- mostly Calvinism (John Calvin, predestination)
- Covenant theology
- Presbyterian form of organization (groups reporting to groups)
LUTHERAN
- Martin Luther (old law is no more)
- subscribes to portion of Covenant Theology that promises are fulfilled now
- church structure = ?
METHODIST
- Arminianism (Jacob Arminius) is about personal responsibility to being good
- John Wellesley took a spin on Arminianism in that he emphasized HOW responsibility is implemented, which is by doing good works and working your way to sinlessness
- of course if don't reach sinlessness, it's ok
- church structure = ?
- it's one step away from Roman Catholicism which also subscribes to Arminianism but says you MUST reach that point of sinlessness to earn salvation
ROMAN CATHOLICISM
- subscribes to Arminianism but says you MUST reach that point of sinlessness to earn salvation
- church structure = Episcopalian (all the way reporting to Pope at the Vatican)
ANGLICAN CHURCH
- branched off from Rome
- English people just wanted to be on their own b/c everyone wanted to do their own thing
- exactly same as Roman Catholicism except reporting goes all the way to Archbishop of Canterbury
PRESBYTERIAN
- mostly Calvinism (John Calvin, predestination)
- Covenant theology
- Presbyterian form of organization (groups reporting to groups)
LUTHERAN
- Martin Luther (old law is no more)
- subscribes to portion of Covenant Theology that promises are fulfilled now
- church structure = ?
METHODIST
- Arminianism (Jacob Arminius) is about personal responsibility to being good
- John Wellesley took a spin on Arminianism in that he emphasized HOW responsibility is implemented, which is by doing good works and working your way to sinlessness
- of course if don't reach sinlessness, it's ok
- church structure = ?
- it's one step away from Roman Catholicism which also subscribes to Arminianism but says you MUST reach that point of sinlessness to earn salvation
ROMAN CATHOLICISM
- subscribes to Arminianism but says you MUST reach that point of sinlessness to earn salvation
- church structure = Episcopalian (all the way reporting to Pope at the Vatican)
ANGLICAN CHURCH
- branched off from Rome
- English people just wanted to be on their own b/c everyone wanted to do their own thing
- exactly same as Roman Catholicism except reporting goes all the way to Archbishop of Canterbury
Covenant vs. Dispensational Theology
From 12/19/2008 (K. Lai)
COVENANT THEOLOGY
- old and new covenants are one long continuation
- new doesn't replace old but is a new form, like baptize babies is the new form of circumcision
- also promises of God's kingdom are completely fulfilled now; no notion of restoring Israel
- there's still the 2nd coming, to come, but promises have happened already
DISPENSATIONAL THEOLOGY
- i.e. Dispensationalism
- Classicial version: promises are yet to come (following 2nd coming); notion of Israel getting restored
- Progressive version: already not yet; subscribes to portion of covenant theology that some promises are now but also some are yet to come
Church Government and History
From 12/19/2008 (K. Lai)
Presbyterian - groups reporting to groups
Episcopalian - individuals reporting to individuals (pope)
Congregational - local branch doesn't report to anyone (like BOL)
Roman Catholicism
|
|
(the Great Schism)
|
____________|____________
| |
| |
Roman Catholicism Eastern Orthodox
(west) (Greek, Russian)
|
|
|
_______|____________________________
| | | |
| | | |
English German Dutch Roman
Anglican Lutheran Calvinists (stayed same)
Notes:
- St. Augustine organized and greatly influenced the theology of the early church (Roman Catholicism) before the Great Schism)
- The Great Schism was a split over whether the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father (west) or sent by the Father and Son (east)
Presbyterian - groups reporting to groups
Episcopalian - individuals reporting to individuals (pope)
Congregational - local branch doesn't report to anyone (like BOL)
Roman Catholicism
|
|
(the Great Schism)
|
____________|____________
| |
| |
Roman Catholicism Eastern Orthodox
(west) (Greek, Russian)
|
|
|
_______|____________________________
| | | |
| | | |
English German Dutch Roman
Anglican Lutheran Calvinists (stayed same)
Notes:
- St. Augustine organized and greatly influenced the theology of the early church (Roman Catholicism) before the Great Schism)
- The Great Schism was a split over whether the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father (west) or sent by the Father and Son (east)
Paradise
Too many beautiful places to visit, with not enough time or money. But guess what? The most beautiful place ever is guaranteed in my future, and I don't need to worry about planning it, paying for it, making the most of it...
I’ve worked hard
And I’m ready for a long vacation
Got some money in my pocket
And I’m going down to the station
Saw a poster on a wall
And the place looked really nice
A man with a beard said follow me
I’ll take you to paradise
If you want to come with me there’s room
There are no legal limits
There’s always room for one more soul
So why not come and get it
I want to ride this train to gloryland
So why don’t you come up here
And join the band?
Met the man with the beard
Halfway through kentucky
He walked with me and he talked with me
Some people say I’m lucky
For that day the man I met payed the full price
Now I ride the train for free
The train to paradise
Gloryland (Audio Adrenaline)
I’ve worked hard
And I’m ready for a long vacation
Got some money in my pocket
And I’m going down to the station
Saw a poster on a wall
And the place looked really nice
A man with a beard said follow me
I’ll take you to paradise
If you want to come with me there’s room
There are no legal limits
There’s always room for one more soul
So why not come and get it
I want to ride this train to gloryland
So why don’t you come up here
And join the band?
Met the man with the beard
Halfway through kentucky
He walked with me and he talked with me
Some people say I’m lucky
For that day the man I met payed the full price
Now I ride the train for free
The train to paradise
Gloryland (Audio Adrenaline)
Why Should We Love Each Other?
From 9/5/2010
Love each other ==> proclaims God / evangelism
Love each other ==> obeys God's command
Love each other ==> completes my joy
John 13:34-35: “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
John 15:9-12: “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you."
Love each other ==> proclaims God / evangelism
Love each other ==> obeys God's command
Love each other ==> completes my joy
John 13:34-35: “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”
John 15:9-12: “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)