Donations for the month of March


We have received a total of "0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Pilgrim
Pilgrim
NH, USA
Posts: 14,450
Joined: April 2001
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,781
Posts54,881
Members974
Most Online732
Jan 15th, 2023
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,447
Tom 4,516
chestnutmare 3,320
J_Edwards 2,615
John_C 1,865
Wes 1,856
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 4
John_C 1
Recent Posts
1 Cor. 6:9-11
by Pilgrim - Thu Mar 28, 2024 2:02 PM
Change in NRSVue text note on 1 John 5:7
by Pilgrim - Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:07 AM
Is the church in crisis
by John_C - Wed Mar 27, 2024 10:52 AM
Jordan Peterson ordered to take sensitivity training
by Tom - Mon Mar 25, 2024 9:00 PM
Should Creeds be read in Church?
by Pilgrim - Mon Mar 25, 2024 6:30 AM
Do Christians have Dual Personalities: Peace & Wretchedness?
by DiscipleEddie - Sat Mar 23, 2024 1:15 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Tim #51324 Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:49 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,450
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,450
Likes: 57
Originally Posted by Tim
I agree with this statement. I think you only believe that it’s inconsistent with what I’m saying because you cannot reconcile simultaneous love and hate.
I cannot reconcile love and hate because they are mutually exclusive. However, what I have labored to establish is that I believe that benevolence and hatred are not mutually exclusive.

Originally Posted by Tim
Question in regards to God’s “hatred for the workers of iniquity”: Does God hate all unjustified sinners, both elect (prior to faith) and reprobate? If Yes, how do you reconcile His eternal love for the elect? If no, how do you reconcile that we were “children of wrath, just as the others”? I would pose that they cannot be reconciled unless God can simultaneously practice both love and hatred.
No, God does not "hate" the unregenerate elect. God's hatred for the reprobate is judicial in nature, i.e., God from eternity determined to render His perfect justice upon the majority of the sinful human race according to their guiltiness. Contrariwise, God in His infinite love and mercy determined to bestow His grace upon a remnant of sinful mankind and redeem them in Christ (Rom 8:29,30; Eph 1:4-13; et al). The elect in their natural, unregenerate state are worthy of God's wrath and judgment, but they are not 'hated' but loved with an everlasting redemptive love in Christ.

Originally Posted by Tim
You also make the argument for your understanding of God’s hatred because He is infinitely holy. I agree. However, He is also infinitely loving, infinitely just, infinitely merciful. How do we understand an infinite being with multiple absolutes? I am hesitant to make an argument like yours since it seems to take one of His attributes without fully taking into account the incomprehensibility of God.
I'm not sure I understand your question here? scratch1

QUESTIONS:

1. Do you believe that God wills "desires", i.e., He sincerely wants all men to be saved? Those who hold this view typically cite 1Tim 2:3,4 as a proof text. IF this is your position, could you please exegete that text?

2. Could you please exegete John 3:16?

Last edited by Pilgrim; Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:54 AM. Reason: Added questions

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Tim #51325 Thu Mar 05, 2015 1:45 PM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 17
Tim Offline OP
Plebeian
OP Offline
Plebeian
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 17
I don't have the time now to exegete those passages in detail now, but I would offer the following.

1. I think the biblical usage of the word "agape" is a commitment to the good of someone else. Such commitment takes different expressions, some being temporal and others eternal.

2. Regarding your first question, I would personally lean toward understanding 2:3-4 in terms of God's revealed/perceptive will. However, I don't feel dogmatic about that interpretation. Of course, Calvin understands it to be speaking about classes of people. However, my biggest reservation in interpreting it this way is that we are told to make intercessions and supplications for all men. It seems unnatural that these prayers would be only for classes of elect people. It also seems unnatural that the emphasis would be switched from individuals to classes of individuals if indeed we are to pray for individuals in this context.

3. In reference to your question, I would agree with John Murray's Free Offer of the Gospel article.

4. Concerning John 3:16, I'm not persuaded I need to exegete something that's been exegeted so many times. I know the arguments and stand with Calvin's exegesis of the passage for reasons I gave in a previous response.

Question: You still haven't reconciled the love and hate that believers are to have to unbelievers. The benevolence spoken of in Matt. 5 is unavoidably called "love" ("love your enemies"). How is it that believers are called to both love and hate their enemies if love and hate are mutually exclusive as you've stated?

Honestly, I'm not sure if there's much more to discuss on the subject. However, I feel fairly confident that our controversy is at the level of vocabulary, not concept. You've made it abundantly clear that God is benevolent to the reprobate. We call the same benevolence something different, but I would certainly not say you are hyper-Calvinist because of it... I have thoroughly enjoyed our discussion on the matter and it had tremendously helped me understand the difference between where I was as a hyper-Calvinist in contrast to your position on the matter, which I believe would be Owen's approach.

Fair?

Tim #51326 Thu Mar 05, 2015 3:17 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,450
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,450
Likes: 57
Fair enough! grin

I have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion with you and the irenic spirit which you have expressed in your responses.

As much as I hold John Murray in very high esteem, I am in disagreement with his view(s), along with Ned Stonehouse in regard to the "Free Offer". And for your benefit particularly, I want to make it crystal clear that I believe the Gospel should be proclaimed to all men everywhere without distinction, calling all to repent and believe upon Christ. My disagreement is with their contradiction of God "desiring" all men to be saved, when the Bible in myriad places states that ALL that God pleases, desires, wills, etc., will infallibly happen, e.g., (Isa 46:10; Ps 33:11, 135:6; Eph 1:9-11; Heb 6:17).

I think? we are in agreement that "will" or "desire" (Gk: thelei) in 1Tim 2:4 is prescriptive, i.e., it is God's command, that which men are required to do, is to repent and believe on Christ and thus be saved. If it was the case that God "willed", that he "desired" that all be saved, then such would be the case and Universalism would be what Paul was teaching, which we both know is illogical and totally erroneous.

Lastly, my exegesis of 1Tim 2:4 is the same as Calvin. Paul is making the point that Christians are to pray for all 'types' of men, which includes even those who are the most evil and those who persecute the Church and not just the poor and down trodden, for all men are in need of salvation in Christ. Thus intercession is to be made in their behalf since they in and of themselves are at enmity with God and without God granting them repentance and faith, they will surely perish.

Thanks again for the exchange. BigThumbUp


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 84 guests, and 17 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
PaulWatkins, His Unworthy Son, Nahum, TheSojourner, Larry
974 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
March
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,506,457 Gospel truth