ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[godrulz]

You and I being about the only two on this sight that disagree with all five points of TULIP find ourselves on the same side of the fence a lot. The one exception is foreknowledge.

I wonder if you could answer the question in my above quote:

Why do you feel that repentance in anyway diffutes the ability to foresee the future?

Friends,
Rob

I do not understand the question. When man fell, then and only then, did God regret making man and experience grief. If man did not fall, then God would not have 'repented'. The Fall was a possibility, not a foregone conclusion (if there was genuine freedom to obey or disobey God, which seems self-evident to me).

The Jonah story involves repentance and has a genuinely conditional, uncertain aspect. If they repented, God would not send judgment. If they did repent, then God would judge. Certain foreknowledge, especially from eternity past, was not possible. The future was open and contingent until the Ninevites made it actual/certain. God would have known their intentions sooner than any man, but this does not mean He sees the open future as settled where free will is involved.

 

[godrulz]

Good post! Those guys need to know we are reading them and hanging on every word.

I love dictionaries especially the ones we are making up. So this is from the Unabriged Butthead and Bevis Dictionary of new words.
diffutes > 1 a combination of defeats and refutes. Add it to your dictionary margin.
-DERIVATIVES defutters >adverb diffuttees >noun.
-ORIGIN originally in the sense 'busted': from Latin ‘wasted that thought'. :chuckle:


This one how ever solicited an apology that was unwarranted.


specious >adjective 1 superficially plausible, but actually wrong. 2 misleading in appearance.
-DERIVATIVES speciously >adverb speciousness >noun.
-ORIGIN originally in the sense 'beautiful': from Latin speciosus 'fair, plausible'. atrol:

“OSAS is specious.” If it is not then you must subscribe to it. OSAS may make sense in the context of Calvinism and it seems to be necessary to their over all system. If you reject a future fixed and unchangeable then the view is superficially plausible but actually wrong. It is certainly misleading in appearance; it can’t produce what it promises: confidence and security. It is essential that if God knows ahead of time, then the future is fixed in regards to salvation of the elect and only the elect.

Being sealed is not necessarily the same as being save once and for all. Seals can be broken. Being sealed with the Holy Spirit tomorrow requires the same faith and intentionality that it does today. Just changing the language doesn't make the dog a greek. So, either get a new dictionary Bob or explain how you can hang on to 'eternal security' (as apposed to a ongoing personal covenant relationship) and still be an open theist. Specious means it ain’t as good as it looks and I don't see how any amount of lipstick will make that bull dog beautiful.

Keep up the good stuff. Inquiring minds need to know.

Philetus

Finally someone who agrees with me, and who is not worried about being diplomatic. :jump:

(I should have stuck with my gut instead of being Mr. Niceguy).

 

[godrulz]

That's a good question and in my thinking simple foreknowledge of repentance does not in and of it's self close the future. I must ask, "Is the God who has the advantage to see the future in precise and meticulous detail from outside of time have an advantage or disadvantage in relating to his creation in the way Open View believes he does?" Is knowing the future a stumbling block to relating? I think so. Repentance keeps the future open to loving relationship, even from God's perspective (e.g. Moses and the people who God almost destroyed, or even me and the Jesus I almost walked away from.)

That's my 2 cents. I'm eager to hear how Godrulz addresses it. Plow on!

Friends forever,
Philetus

A loving, relational, risk view seems more biblical than a no-risk, metaphysical view. God's love is biblical and fundamental ("God is love"). Exhaustive, simple foreknowledge is philosophically tainted and unnecessary for a biblical definition of omniscience (knows all that is knowable, not that which is logically absurd or contradictory).

 

[RobE]

4

I do not understand the question. When man fell, then and only then, did God regret making man and experience grief. If man did not fall, then God would not have 'repented'. The Fall was a possibility, not a foregone conclusion (if there was genuine freedom to obey or disobey God, which seems self-evident to me).

Have you ever done something that you planned in advance; and, when it was completed, exactly as you foresaw it, you had remorse for what happened? For example; have you ever had to kill a family pet for some reason?

You and I being about the only two on this sight that disagree with all five points of TULIP find ourselves on the same side of the fence a lot. The one exception is foreknowledge.

I wonder if you could answer the question in my above quote:

Why do you feel that repentance in anyway diffutes the ability to foresee the future?

The Jonah story involves repentance and has a genuinely conditional, uncertain aspect. If they repented, God would not send judgment. If they did repent, then God would judge. Certain foreknowledge, especially from eternity past, was not possible. The future was open and contingent until the Ninevites made it actual/certain. God would have known their intentions sooner than any man, but this does not mean He sees the open future as settled where free will is involved.

The Jonah story is obviously a threat from God which Jonah himself believed would change the disposition of the Ninevites. Did God fully intend to destroy them if there was no repentence? Yes. How would this change what God foresaw happening(the Ninevites repenting)? If the Ninevites didn't repent would it actually change history? If so, how so?

Open Theism has two obstacles in it's thinking here. First, they must prove that God didn't know what the Ninevites would do; even though, Jonah apparently knew. In your opinion did Jonah know more than God? Are you sure you want to hold on to you current position on this subject?

Secondly, you have to prove that the future was indeed changed by the Ninevites(God) decision. Not overlooking that there would be some Ninevites still dead that lived; had they not repented; I still must wonder what the significant change to world history would have been? And, you must realize that if the Ninevites repented then God changed the future, the Ninevites did not since the change was---- God didn't destroy them. In fact, I can't think of a time when a man changed the future in any Open Theist's arguments. It's always God changing the future.

It's like Tyre. Neb. didn't destroy Tyre utterly, but Alexander did; even using the method that God said Tyre's destroyer would use. Interesting. Do you think Neb. not destroying the city of Tyre had a real, significant impact on world history? Was it just a threat by God to shape up?

I wonder if God can tinker with His own creation; and, still further His perfect plan? In Open Theism this would be wrong, of course.

Warmly,
Rob

 

[godrulz]

4


I wonder if God can tinker with His own creation; and, still further His perfect plan? In Open Theism this would be wrong, of course.

Warmly,
Rob

Do you mean suspend our free will? God does tinker and intervene in His creation as necessary. This does not mean that He always controls everything. He furthers His project and perfect plan within the parameters of creatures with significant freedom. He does things unilaterally when He wants, but choses to do many things cooperatively. Hitler was not part of God's perfect plan, yet He will culminate history in the end despite this heinous evil (the Jews who died did not see God's intentions for themselves...God allowed this, but did not condone nor cause it).

 

[elected4ever]

Do you mean suspend our free will? God does tinker and intervene in His creation as necessary. This does not mean that He always controls everything. He furthers His project and perfect plan within the parameters of creatures with significant freedom. He does things unilaterally when He wants, but choses to do many things cooperatively. Hitler was not part of God's perfect plan, yet He will culminate history in the end despite this heinous evil (the Jews who died did not see God's intentions for themselves...God allowed this, but did not condone nor cause it).

How do you know?

 

[godrulz]

How do you know?

Know what? I make up things as I go to tickle my itching ears :idea:

God said creation was very good. After the Fall, He was grieved and wanted to wipe it out. Does this sound like exhaustive control? Did God intend to bring evil, heartache, suffering, disaster to His own heart and His perfect creation? God is NOT responsible for heinous evil. If He controlled everything unilaterally, the present world would not look like this and His redemption and future restoration of creation would be negated in value or necessity.

Jesus came to oppose sin, sickness, and evil. He did not affirm it as God's will. If it was God's will, we have the problematic scenario of a good Jesus opposing the work and will of a bad Father. This is nonsense. The Father and Son are perfect in love and holiness, not opposed to each other. Jesus came to destroy the works of the Enemy, not to bless them as God's mysterious, sovereign will.

How do I know? The clarion call of biblical revelation of God's character and ways. Evil is contrary to, not consistent with God's plan. He responds to and redeems situations. He does not cause every situation.

There is no comfort at a funeral to say that it is God's will that your child got raped and murdered. God's heart is broken at the extent of evil in man's heart. Just because He created man with significant freedom does not mean that He causes, coerces, manipulates, or desires the misuse of freedom. He created Lucifer, not Satan. He created Adam in a perfect state. Adam blew it and fell into a sinful state.

 

[elected4ever]

Know what? I make up things as I go to tickle my itching ears :idea:

God said creation was very good. After the Fall, He was grieved and wanted to wipe it out. Does this sound like exhaustive control? Did God intend to bring evil, heartache, suffering, disaster to His own heart and His perfect creation? God is NOT responsible for heinous evil. If He controlled everything unilaterally, the present world would not look like this and His redemption and future restoration of creation would be negated in value or necessity.

Jesus came to oppose sin, sickness, and evil. He did not affirm it as God's will. If it was God's will, we have the problematic scenario of a good Jesus opposing the work and will of a bad Father. This is nonsense. The Father and Son are perfect in love and holiness, not opposed to each other. Jesus came to destroy the works of the Enemy, not to bless them as God's mysterious, sovereign will.

How do I know? The clarion call of biblical revelation of God's character and ways. Evil is contrary to, not consistent with God's plan. He responds to and redeems situations. He does not cause every situation.

There is no comfort at a funeral to say that it is God's will that your child got raped and murdered. God's heart is broken at the extent of evil in man's heart. Just because He created man with significant freedom does not mean that He causes, coerces, manipulates, or desires the misuse of freedom. He created Lucifer, not Satan. He created Adam in a perfect state. Adam blew it and fell into a sinful state.

Romans 8:28 *And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29 *¶For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 *Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
31 *¶What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
32 *He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
33 *Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.
34 *Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
35 *Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
36 *As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
37 *Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
38 *For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 *Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Everything is not good but every thing works together for the good. Our understanding and judgment of what is good and what is bad are all according to the purpose that God has purposed for those who love Him. I submit sis that you and i are not smart enough to determine werther God has determined an evil that exist in this would for the purpose of the good of those who love Him.

Isaiah 45:1 *¶Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;
2 *I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron:
3 *And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, the LORD, which call thee by thy name, am the God of Israel.
4 *For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
5 *¶I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
6 *That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
7 *I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

 

[godrulz]

It is a bizarre, cruel doctrine that minimizes evil and the holiness of God, to say that God uses evil for God. God does redeem situations and develops character in us and tries to bring good out of things. This is after the fact. He does not cause or orchestrate death, destruction, heinous evil to serve a hidden, mysterious purpose. God is fundamentally opposed to evil. Satan and man's free will explains evil. It was never intended by God. It cost the life of Christ as a response and remedy to evil.

Our triumph in and through Christ, despite the horrific evil around us, is to God's glory. Attributing evil to God or His micromanaging of evil for higher purposes goes beyond any proof text and contradicts the explicit revelation of His character and ways.

The brutal rape and murder of children has nothing to do with God. There is no good that comes out of this. The child is gone, totally against God's will (God wisely does not always snuff out evil at the moment, but justice will be done in the end, and His presence will comfort those who must deal with a fallen world...this is not the way things were meant to be...we are not in restored Paradise yet). All things work for the good by conforming us to the image of Christ (context). Killing millions of Jews is not inherently good, nor was it worked out totally for a higher good. People who think God causes heinous evil run from, not to, this false deity.

 

[elected4ever]

It is a bizarre, cruel doctrine that minimizes evil and the holiness of God, to say that God uses evil for God. God does redeem situations and develops character in us and tries to bring good out of things. This is after the fact. He does not cause or orchestrate death, destruction, heinous evil to serve a hidden, mysterious purpose. God is fundamentally opposed to evil. Satan and man's free will explains evil. It was never intended by God. It cost the life of Christ as a response and remedy to evil.

Our triumph in and through Christ, despite the horrific evil around us, is to God's glory. Attributing evil to God or His micromanaging of evil for higher purposes goes beyond any proof text and contradicts the explicit revelation of His character and ways.

The brutal rape and murder of children has nothing to do with God. There is no good that comes out of this. The child is gone, totally against God's will (God wisely does not always snuff out evil at the moment, but justice will be done in the end, and His presence will comfort those who must deal with a fallen world...this is not the way things were meant to be...we are not in restored Paradise yet). All things work for the good by conforming us to the image of Christ (context). Killing millions of Jews is not inherently good, nor was it worked out totally for a higher good. People who think God causes heinous evil run from, not to, this false deity.

We need to understand something. God allows and disallows things for His own pleasure and will. God is under no obligation to save any man but he does. He loved man so much that He gave the most valuable position He had to redeem man from his own self inflicted demise. The fact is that man does not know he is bound for eternal destruction and has no capability to change that course. It is not that God chose not to retain man in his thoughts but man who has chosen not to retain God. All through Biblical history it has been God teaching man about Himself and has dealt with man in diverse ways. It is God's self revelation of Himself. He has done this because of His love for man, not man's love for God. Man by his very nature is opposed to God. Unless man can see the demonstration of the evil of his rejection will he ever turn to search for the good. This is the drawing of the Holy Spirit. So no man comes to God unless he be drawn.

 

[RobE]

Godrulz, You still haven't answered my question.

Godrulz, You still haven't answered my question.

My Question.

I wonder if you could answer the question in my above quote:

Why do you feel that repentance in anyway diffutes the ability to foresee the future?​

Your Answer.

Originally Posted by godrulz

I do not understand the question. When man fell, then and only then, did God regret making man and experience grief. If man did not fall, then God would not have 'repented'. The Fall was a possibility, not a foregone conclusion (if there was genuine freedom to obey or disobey God, which seems self-evident to me).​

My Response to your Answer.

Have you ever done something that you planned in advance; and, when it was completed, exactly as you foresaw it, you had remorse for what happened? For example; have you ever had to kill a family pet for some reason?​

As far as I can tell you haven't explained why repenting would disprove foresight. Would you clarify?

_______________________

Do you mean suspend our free will? God does tinker and intervene in His creation as necessary. This does not mean that He always controls everything. He furthers His project and perfect plan within the parameters of creatures with significant freedom. He does things unilaterally when He wants, but choses to do many things cooperatively. Hitler was not part of God's perfect plan, yet He will culminate history in the end despite this heinous evil (the Jews who died did not see God's intentions for themselves...God allowed this, but did not condone nor cause it).

Cooperatively with men like a man uses his own creation(i.e. hammer, saw, etc) to further his own work.

Or

Does God require you to do something independently? Works, maybe?

Interested,
Rob

p.s. Are you ignoring the scriptures where God used Neb. or told Israel to destory all the inhabitants, etc? Does God forge tools for His own hand like Paul?

 

[elected4ever]

The fact is that God planed the crucification of Christ before man was even made and open theism cannot account for it. It defies their logic and so they hang there hat on a contingency theory. The only problem with that is that the scripture does not say anything about such a contingency.

 

[RobE]

Godrulz, you misunderstand 'Traditional' Doctrine.

Godrulz, you misunderstand 'Traditional' Doctrine.

It is a bizarre, cruel doctrine that minimizes evil and the holiness of God, to say that God uses evil for God. God does redeem situations and develops character in us and tries to bring good out of things. This is after the fact. He does not cause or orchestrate death, destruction, heinous evil to serve a hidden, mysterious purpose. God is fundamentally opposed to evil. Satan and man's free will explains evil. It was never intended by God. It cost the life of Christ as a response and remedy to evil.

This is exactly why you consider yourself an 'Open' theist. You mis-read my doctrine. 'Satan and man's free will explains sin'. Evil is a condition which exists naturally in the universe.

Just because God foresaw the 'evil' excercise of free will doesn't mean that He caused it. As you are fond of saying; God at some point foreknew the world trade center bombings and allowed it to happen. How does it matter that He foresaw it 2 minutes beforehand vs. 2 eons beforehand?

My doctrine would be: God, foreseeing the fall and outcome of mankind, worked to bring 'good' outcomes from mankind's intentions. The beginning of things came through Jesus Christ and the conclusion of things are in Jesus Christ. God allowed this for His own reasons, just as He allows the rape and murder of children for His own reasons. Allowing something is not doing something. You would imprint culpability for evil onto Our Lord if He foresaw evil acts while admitting that He foreknows evil acts :dizzy: .

The duplicity occurs when you say that it's evil for God to create mankind knowing Adam would fall. As if all the things that have occured on the Earth are evil. Is there no 'good' in an open theist's world?

If God had 'aborted' creation after seeing the fall of mankind, wouldn't all the 'good' which has happened not occured either. Should God have thrown the 'good' out with the 'bad'? Didn't Peter deserve His life despite Judas?

In order for Open Theism's hands to remain clean, using Open Theism's own logic , God would have had to destroy Adam when Adam fell. Why? Because God at that moment knew(beforehand) the kind of destruction sin would cause in mankind and pre-determined to continue with Adam. So is Adam responsible for sin in the world since God allowed Adam to live and procreate? Using OV's logic this is a fair question. Another one would be: Is it better for 2 to be thrown into the lake of fire or 2 billion? 2 billion is closer to reality because of God's decision. In this sense, your logic to attack foreknowledge becomes a terrible thing since it can be asked of 'open' theism with equal force.

Why didn't God destroy Adam and continue His plan for mankind with a different creation? By not doing this didn't He condemn untold millions to eternal suffering. Why not make one man at a time. If the man turns out OK; then move that man to a different location. Do you see? Am I wasting my thoughts?

My answer: Jesus Christ was that plan.
Your answer: I doubt if you've considered this.

Clarity,
Rob

 

[Philetus]

Elected4ever

We need to understand something. God allows and disallows things for His own pleasure and will. God is under no obligation to save any man but he does. He loved man so much that He gave the most valuable position He had to redeem man from his own self inflicted demise. The fact is that man does not know he is bound for eternal destruction and has no capability to change that course. It is not that God chose not to retain man in his thoughts but man who has chosen not to retain God. All through Biblical history it has been God teaching man about Himself and has dealt with man in diverse ways. It is God's self revelation of Himself. He has done this because of His love for man, not man's love for God. Man by his very nature is opposed to God. Unless man can see the demonstration of the evil of his rejection will he ever turn to search for the good. This is the drawing of the Holy Spirit. So no man comes to God unless he be drawn.

Are you saying that God allows evil for his pleasure? God takes no pleasure in evil. IMO he is willing to suffer evil for the pleasure of redemption. I think one of the hall marks of this issue, an open verses a closed future, is that the closed view must lump everything into a single category that God is meticulously knowledgeable of if not directly responsible for. The open view acknowledges the existence of surd evil but neither requires God to know of it in advance nor makes God responsible for it after the fact. The open view of the future takes into full account that God in Christ is reconciling the whole world unto himself. God not only sent his son to the cross, in Jesus God actually went to the cross rather than send others. In Jesus God is most actively involved, bringing about his purposes and seeing to their collusion according to his own will and pleasure. God takes no pleasure in the death of his son but delights greatly in what it accomplishes: the redemption of all who believe.

The closed view as you have illustrated above requires a much more negative approach in reconciling the sovereignty and love of God with the existence of evil. In his sovereignty God has chosen to love evil men who by their own volition choose to deny God. And according to Romans 1 they are given over to their own depravity by God’s choice. Choosing to forget God they have spiraled down to the point of not knowing who they are or how to treat their neighbors. For that reason, Paul says, God has given them over to their own sinning and more sinning. And I agree in spirit that it is his love not ours that motivates him to save anybody. In fact I believe that it was the son’s love for the father (not even his love for us ... though he did in fact love us) that motivated him to lay down his life as the supreme sacrifice. No greater lesson can be learned about the nature and self revelation of God. Such a revelation is the drawing power of God to redeem lost men and women.

I would take exception to your post at one point in particular. Paul says Romans 1:18 and 19 that what may be know about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. It isn’t that lost men have no capacity for knowing anything about God it is that they “suppress the truth about God” by their wickedness. Therefore, all men are without excuse; what may be know about God is ever before them. They choose to exchange the truth about God for a lie (Rom.1:25) Yet, God’s kindness leads us to a change of heart. (Rom. 2:4) It is because of stubbornness and unrepentance that men store up for themselves wrath on the day of wrath, when God will give to each person according to what he has done.( Rom. 2:5&6) Surely, the he in ‘what he has done’ refers to each person, not God. The only remedy against such wrath is to give up the suppression of truth for the lie it is and repent, believe and receive the gift of God. Repentance clears the future of the fear of wrath and judgement and opens it to new possibilities in reminding others of who God is in Christ and who we are in Christ and who they can be in Christ. Christ in you the hope of glory. In such reminding, we are calling attention to the work of God in Christ which continues in the work of the Holy Spirit. We lift up Christ, and he draws. We are commanded to lift him up in our words and ways. But, he alone draws.

Philetus

 

[Philetus]

RobE,

RobE: Why didn't God destroy Adam and continue His plan for mankind with a different creation? By not doing this didn't He condemn untold millions to eternal suffering. Why not make one man at a time. If the man turns out OK; then move that man to a different location. Do you see? Am I wasting my thoughts?

If you sin I will kill you is not the same as saying "If you eat you will die." Why didn't God destroy his people in the desert? Why didn’t God destroy Nineveh? Why hasn't God killed all the Open Theists or the Calvinist and the Arminians? Are you forgetting the 'multiply and replenish' thing? or the have 'dominion over' or something even as simple as 'come up with a name for that big fat animal with the stubby tail and horn'? and live anywhere you want to?

Are you wasting your thoughts? I don't know. Are you seeking truth or defending a dogma?

Respectfully,
Philetus

 

[RobE]

Please don't snorkel on a scuba-diving expedition.

Please don't snorkel on a scuba-diving expedition.

RobE,



If you sin I will kill you is not the same as saying "If you eat you will die." Why didn't God destroy his people in the desert? Why didn’t God destroy Nineveh? Why hasn't God killed all the Open Theists or the Calvinist and the Arminians? Are you forgetting the 'multiply and replenish' thing? or the have 'dominion over' or something even as simple as 'come up with a name for that big fat animal with the stubby tail and horn'? and live anywhere you want to?

Are you wasting your thoughts? I don't know. Are you seeking truth or defending a dogma?

Respectfully,
Philetus

Philetus,

Why does it matter WHEN God finds out about wrongdoing if He's going to allow it anyway?

Rob

 

[Philetus]

My answer: Jesus Christ was that plan.
Your answer: I doubt if you've considered this.

Clarity,
Rob

Rob, you can’t really believe that. Your view has better arguments than, “then you don’t know Jesus or consider Jesus.” I most certainly believe that you are considering Jesus Christ. It’s the details we are trying to hammer out. Not each other’s heads.

Still friends,
Daniel

 

[Philetus]

Philetus,

Why does it matter WHEN God finds out about wrongdoing if He's going to allow it anyway?

Rob

It doesn't.
Philetus

 

[Philetus]

It matters if he knows before hand.
Philetus

 

[elected4ever]

Elected4ever


Are you saying that God allows evil for his pleasure? God takes no pleasure in evil. IMO he is willing to suffer evil for the pleasure of redemption. I think one of the hall marks of this issue, an open verses a closed future, is that the closed view must lump everything into a single category that God is meticulously knowledgeable of if not directly responsible for. The open view acknowledges the existence of surd evil but neither requires God to know of it in advance nor makes God responsible for it after the fact. The open view of the future takes into full account that God in Christ is reconciling the whole world unto himself. God not only sent his son to the cross, in Jesus God actually went to the cross rather than send others. In Jesus God is most actively involved, bringing about his purposes and seeing to their collusion according to his own will and pleasure. God takes no pleasure in the death of his son but delights greatly in what it accomplishes: the redemption of all who believe.

The closed view as you have illustrated above requires a much more negative approach in reconciling the sovereignty and love of God with the existence of evil. In his sovereignty God has chosen to love evil men who by their own volition choose to deny God. And according to Romans 1 they are given over to their own depravity by God’s choice. Choosing to forget God they have spiraled down to the point of not knowing who they are or how to treat their neighbors. For that reason, Paul says, God has given them over to their own sinning and more sinning. And I agree in spirit that it is his love not ours that motivates him to save anybody. In fact I believe that it was the son’s love for the father (not even his love for us ... though he did in fact love us) that motivated him to lay down his life as the supreme sacrifice. No greater lesson can be learned about the nature and self revelation of God. Such a revelation is the drawing power of God to redeem lost men and women.

I would take exception to your post at one point in particular. Paul says Romans 1:18 and 19 that what may be know about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. It isn’t that lost men have no capacity for knowing anything about God it is that they “suppress the truth about God” by their wickedness. Therefore, all men are without excuse; what may be know about God is ever before them. They choose to exchange the truth about God for a lie (Rom.1:25) Yet, God’s kindness leads us to a change of heart. (Rom. 2:4) It is because of stubbornness and unrepentance that men store up for themselves wrath on the day of wrath, when God will give to each person according to what he has done.( Rom. 2:5&6) Surely, the he in ‘what he has done’ refers to each person, not God. The only remedy against such wrath is to give up the suppression of truth for the lie it is and repent, believe and receive the gift of God. Repentance clears the future of the fear of wrath and judgement and opens it to new possibilities in reminding others of who God is in Christ and who we are in Christ and who they can be in Christ. Christ in you the hope of glory. In such reminding, we are calling attention to the work of God in Christ which continues in the work of the Holy Spirit. We lift up Christ, and he draws. We are commanded to lift him up in our words and ways. But, he alone draws.

Philetus

You are putting words in my mouth, Philitus. Before we get to far into this you should ask yourself, Is God a God of vengeance as well as a God of love?