RE: [TruthTalk] God Hates

[Wm. Taylor]

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wm. Taylor Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 2:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] God Hates   Izzy asks  >  Why is this so important to you, Bill? Why is the idea that our salvation happened before we believed it (vs the idea that salvation is provided but only occurs when one receives it willingly by faith) of such paramount significance to you? Because it gives preeminence to Jesus Christ, he whom the Bible calls our Lord and Savior.  Not to be disagreeable, but I DO give ALL preemincence to Jesus. BT: I'm sure you genuinely believe you do, Izzy. How much more preeminent would he be if you would credit all of your salvation to him and did not credit any of your salvation to your faithful response and obedient perseverance? You do consider these to be conditions that you must meet in order for salvation to be yours, don't you?   Arminianism is a nowhere road, Izzy. The only way it works is IF you are willing to put believers alongside Jesus Christ and call them both Saviors.  The requirements of faith and obedience do not make us co-redeemers.  They are God�s requirements, not Man�s.  They are repeatedly demanded by God throughout all of scripture.  BT: Those "requirements" do make you "co-redeemers" when you make your salvation contingent upon their fulfillment. Yes, God makes commandments, but only after or in the context of the indicatives of his grace. I once tried to show you this and Judy so erupted that I finally dropped it. To insist otherwise is to make one�s theology preeminent over God�s Word.   BT: It only places one's theology over God's word if it is false, Izzy. But if it is true and you refuse to believe or even consider it, it is disobedience.   Historically speaking -- since the Reformation, that is -- the other evangelical alternative has been Calvinism. It at least upholds the absolute agency of God in salvation and recognizes humanity as the helpless lot it is. But I am not in favor of what it does to the character of God in the process. I am excited about Trinitarian\Incarnational Theology because it gets beyond the never ending pitwars of Arminian v Calvinist infighting. This is truly an exceptional theology. It is historically grounded in the early church (not that that makes it true, but it does give it precedence that places it in close proximity to NT times). It upholds the Reformed tenet of sola gracia, yet it does this without shifting blame toward God for those who refuse to believe. At the same time it allows for full participation in salvation, without making salvation an act of co-redemption. Bill I am glad you are excited about something. You may think I�m an airhead because such theological complexities don�t interest me. However to me such endeavors only serve to put Theology above the Simplicity of believing and accepting His Word without second-guessing, questioning, or out-maneuvering HIS will.  Whether or not people argue about their theologies is not an issue for me, and causes me no loss of sleep. I don�t need to resolve it. I don�t need to understand everything about it. I just accept it �as a little child.�   BT: I don't get this one, Izzy. You ask me why I think this is so important and when I answer you, you grab onto it and use it as an opportunity to extol the higher virtues of ignorance. Maybe if you took a little more interest in your heritage you would appreciate the hard work of your brothers and sisters who have. In the meantime, do not suppose that I don't accept it "as a little child." The word for child means formable, impressionable, someone who can be shaped and molded. I don't know, Izzy, it seems to me that most Evangelicals, if they've been Christians very long, get pretty set in their ways.   The above mentioned teaching is of paramount significance because it lets love be what it is: unconditional. That is the problem with this Theology you have embraced.  God�s love is not unconditional. It is free for those who will receive it by meeting His conditions, because He paid the price to make it possible.  BT: God's love is unconditional, Izzy. God is love. What "conditions" were there when all there was was the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Did God change his nature when he created? Is the love he has for us different than the love that he is in his being, the love that he shares with his Son in the Holy Spirit? Are you the kind of mother who would say "I'll love you if and only if you do your chores, and your homework, and eat all your vegetables"? Assuming you're not, Do you think it would be wrong if you were? I do. But from where does this right sense come if not from God? Why should it be wrong for us to place conditions upon our love if this is how God enacts his love for us? God's love is unconditional. He loved us before we loved him. Did you get that? -- Does this not indicate that he also loved us before we were meeting any of his requirements?    But Jesus said we should count the cost and gave a few conditions:, �Luke 14:26   If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. 27   And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. 28   For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? BT: Yes, Izzy, the Gospel calls for a radical departure from life-as-we-used-to-live-it. But it does not conditionally link this departure to Christ's love. Here you miss the vicarious nature of Christ's mediation. His response is our response. He takes our feeble efforts, glorifies them and presents them perfected to the Father. Knowing this sets us free to be ever growing in his love. The yoke is easy and the burden light, Izzy, because we are yoked to him and he is carrying the load.     At the same time it calls us to unconditional obedience. In the words of James B. Torrance (Thomas' younger brother, who died last year at 81) it distinguishes between "legal repentance" and "evangelical repentance." Please consider his words: Legal repentance says: �Repent, and if you repent you will be forgiven,� as if God is persuaded into being merciful by our acts of repentance. No, God gave us these conditions. Jesus said in Luke 13:3 AND 13:5: 3   "I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. Here our forgiveness is conditional upon our deeds of obedience. BT: I guess I am missing your point, Izzy. How does this take away from what I've said? The "repentance" to which Jesus is referring is a repentance from their rejection of him. If anyone rejects Jesus Christ and the salvation he provided, and then refuses from that moment on to repent, he or she will certainly perish.   Jesus said our obedience is the �fruit� of repentance. Matt:3-9:Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance. BT: Did he now?   When the prodigal son returns, the Father puts off the party of restoration until after the son has truly demonstrated his contrition and change of heart and thus merited the restoration of status. The prodigal son repented by the sheer act of humbling himself and returing. His father could tell what was in his heart before the words were out of his mouth. His father received him because he repented (1st) and returned (2nd). BT: Okay. Well, you already know what I think, seeing as how I am the one who is quoting Torrance:   Evangelical repentance, on the other hand, says: �Christ has borne your sins on the cross, therefore repent.� In evangelical repentance, forgiveness is logically prior to repentance. God has spoken his word of forgiveness on the cross, and it is this word that summons forth our repentance and obedience. The father runs down the road when his prodigal son returns and cuts short the son�s prepared confession, ordering his son�s immediate restoration and the killing of the fatted calf. I could go on and on, Izzy, and, the Lord willing, I will continue to espouse these views. I am very much encouraged by your words earlier. Thanks again. I am glad to be sparking some interest -- even if for now it provides but fodder for disagreement.   Blessings,     Bill   We will be doomed to never come to agreement here? Hope not! Izzy