Isa 10:5 Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger! And the staff in their hand is My fury.
Isa 10:6 I will send him against an ungodly nation, and against the people of My wrath. I will command him to take the plunder, and to strip off the spoil, and to trample them like the mud of the streets.
Isa 10:7 Yet he does not plan this, nor does his heart think so. For it is in his heart to destroy and cut off not a few nations.
Isa 10:8 For he says, Are not my commanders all like kings? [+/-] show/hide
posted by Unknown at Sunday, September 10, 2006
2 comments
2 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Let me make a differentiation between Divine Providence and Predestination: the first involves the working of God in the events of the temporal world, the latter is the working of God in the salvation of sinners. They are closely akin, but not quite the same. but since this discussion on Providence has moved back to Predestination I’ll continue in that vein.
You ask if I believe in double predestination. In short, no. To elaborate: I do not believe I double predestination in the sense that God ordains people to Hell in the same way that he ordains others to heaven. This is a very complex subject, so bear with me while I try to say precisely what I believe. God does not work in the hearts of sinners to make them sinful. They want to be sinful. God does not force people to sin. They sin because they want to. God did need to prod Asserya to invade Israel. They had resolved in their hearts to “destroy and cut off not a few nations” God used this sinful and proud nation to accomplish his chastising of his people.
I think that I would agree with the just of what you said about Judas, Pharaoh, and Assyria. God raised Pharaoh up to make his power known (Ex 9:16) and used his self-will and sin to accomplish his good pleasure. Where I would differ is the “predestination on the basis of foreknowledge” premis. What is your basis for that doctrine? Anyway you cut it, I think that Romans 9, Titus 3:5 and 2Tim 1:9 defy that idea.
There is scriptural evidence that God is in control even when human sin is involved. For example: 20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade 45 Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so. (1 Kings 22) Saul killed himself, but 10 verses later God is said to have killed him for his sin (1 Chron 10:4, 14) However, God is not the author of evil. 16 For all that is in the world, … is not of the Father, but is of the world.(1 John 2) …for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed…17 [God is called] the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. (Jam 1) So there’s a paradox for you.
I think that God works through the sinful decisions of man. Man’s free will does not dictate his plan but is the means that he uses to acomplish his will. All this without his being the author of sin. Somewhat mind-boggling? I’ll be the first to admit that one. If you ask me, the this one boils down to the question of why God allowed sin in the first place. Let’s face it, God could have made a world without the option of sin. If his main interest was getting every human being that would ever walk the planet to heaven he could have done it. He is God after all. Was it because he wanted man to choose him of his own free will, without compulsion? He knew he wouldn't. I further more see no bais for that view anywhere in the Scripture. The scriptural answer seems to be this: He ordained all things to make his glory known, both in heaven and on earth. God didn’t make man because he was lonely. He was a self-fulfilled Trinity that need nothing outside itself.(acts 17:24, 25, Job 22:2) He didn’t make man to choose him of his of his own free will and counterbalance the angels who served him by compulsion. The angels obviously had a choice to not serve him seeing many of them rebelled and fell.(Jude 1:6 and 2Peter 2:4) He created man for his good pleasure and his glory. Rev 4:11 : Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. In Numbers 14:21 God says “But truly, as I live, and as all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD” He makes kingdoms to rise and fall for his glory and the glory of his name. “And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?” (Dan 4:35)
Anyway, that little rabbit trail probably did not do much to convince you that I’m not hyper. I’m not though. I think that the rest of scripture indicates that the hardening that God did to Pharaoh’s heart was passive, not active. Basically, God did not soften his heart. I think that it might even be accurate to say that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart by allowing him to harden his own heart.
I’ll be frank and say that I am a bit offended at your comparing my view of God’s wooing his bride to a man raping a woman than forcing her to love him under the penalty of death. The bible is clear that God sought and bought his bride and draws her to himself. Rape has nothing in common with God’s drawing his people to himself (or with love for that matter). I’ll quote from you at some length and reply.
“Being made in the image of God, we have His attributes. We show in ourselves love, hate, grace, mercy, judgment, justice, conscienciousness, sovereignity, will, etc. Is a king intimidated by letting a peasant have a choice? Is a king less sovereign for not making all His subjects robots? No rather, this King has a goal in mind, that is fellowship and communion with a bride. Imagine a love story where a man forced himself on a woman and made her love him on penalty of death for not. We have a sign here in Baton Rouge that says, "Against her will, against the law." It doesn't matter how great your love is for the other, if you only find that love returned by means of force. No, that is not the God I know, nor the Bible I read. I God I know is love. He has made every attempt to woo His bride. He has gone to the harlot, and paid her price and done all He could to bring her back into His house. He has no respect for anyone's person. All received the invitation. All that was require on their part was to accept this great love that was freely bestowed on them as a gift from their Beloved.”
Let this be stated: God is sovereign however he chooses to work. I’m not saying “God is sovereign, and that means absolute control, so if you ascribe anything less than absolute control than you are making him less than sovereign.” What I am saying is this “ The bible tells us that God is sovereign. The Bible tells us that God controls areas A, B and C. Therefore control of areas A, B and C is sovereignty.”
I have stated that God does give us choice and we are not robots. We are made in the image of God for goodness sake. You seem to be concerned that my view lessens the image of God in man. My view lessens man, to be sure, but I don’t see that the scripture is replete with praise of the majesty of man. God is far above and beyond any human king or master. His ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts. (somewhere in Jer) Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; and his greatness is unsearchable. (Ps 145:3)
Okay, this one’s been bothering me, so I’ll address it now. Nowhere do I see sovereignty ever attributed anyone but God. In contrast, I found these passages interesting. “… which he will display at the proper time--he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords,” 1Ti 6:15 “…ungodly men, turning the grace of our Lord God into riotousness and denying the only sovereign Ruler and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jud 1:4) I think that to attribute sovereignty to man because he is make in the image of God is somewhat presumptuous. Something like saying “God is omniscient, therefore being make in his image I must be omniscient too” There are lot of things that God is and we are not. Omnipresent, self existent, all-powerful… you get the point. His will is called immutable, where ours never is. (heb 6:17) Furthermore, all of the ways in which man IS made in the image of God are completely subordinate to God himself. For example, we are creative like God is creative. Now we cannot create something out of nothing like he can, we have to use what his creativity has supplied, but we are none the less creative. We can only have true love, mercy grace and justice insofar as we partake in his love, mercy, grace and justice. The attributes that we take from him are subject to Him.
Your comment brings up this question: who is the bride that Christ paid the price for? The whole world is not the Bride of Christ, that title is given only the Church. Does Christ woo the whole world, even if they are not part of the Beloved? This is where we come to the doctrine known as limited anonement, the most contested and controversial of all the doctrines known as Calvinism, so much so that many dub themselves “four point Calvinists” finding this one too much to swallow. Here we find ourselves in very deep theological water where the paradoxes of Scripture are perhaps at their greatest. The call has gone out to all the world and all will be judged by how they respond to it. But there is also a call that is only unto salvation.
Reformed theology traditionally makes a differentiation between general calling and effectual calling. Kletos (strongs 2822) is the greek word for the calling unto salvation used in the NT. The only time it us used of a universal call is in Matt 22:14 “many are called but few are chosen” (which doesn’t hurt my point any). 2564 is primarily a summoning or naming. When it is speaking of calling in the sense we are talking about it seems to usually be referring to effectual calling with a few exceptions: Lu 5:32 "I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance." and Luke 14 "A man was giving a feast, and he invited many… 18 But they all alike began to make excuses…than the master… said ‘Go out into the highways and along the hedges, and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled… 24 For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste of my dinner.' “ Again, though it speaks of a general calling which is rejected he compels others to come in. I did not say it, Jesus did. So (bringing the point back to where we started) if you will accuse God of “forcing” his salvation on a reluctant recipient, so be it. I would add, however, we love him because he first loved us. God regenerated us and gave us a heart of flesh for our heart of stone. I somehow don’t envision anyone sulking in heaven casting sidelong glares at God, because they were forced to be saved. He draws us to himself and we receive his call with joy. As I have said before, everyone gets what they want.
Rom 1:6 [the Gentiles] among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ; 7 to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints” indicating that there where Gentiles and those called out form among them Acts 2:39"For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself." “And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” (Ro 8:28) Things don’t word out for the good for everyone, but those who love God and are called. “…but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1Co 1:24) In short, “Many are called and few are chosen.” (mat 22:14) “you can’t have it both ways!” is the common response. I beg to differ. If the Bible has it both ways I can. There is obviously a calling to all the world, and one to the church. I’ll leave this one there.
I've gotten a but more that I bargained for on this post. I am constantly amazed at the majesty of our God. I'll close with this quote from Matthew Henry:
...And that for such as these Christ should die is such a mystery, such a paradox, such an unprecedented instance of love, that it may well be our business to eternity to adore and wonder at it.
Post a Comment
Hide comments