# Wow...



## ABondSlaveofChristJesus (Feb 3, 2005)

This is where Christianity in the evangelical world is going....

"many free-will believers say that a man can not come to Christ without being led to him (by God himself).  As in, Gods grace is shed on them, and by that grace they see their sin (the destruction is brings) and the remedy (which is Christ).  This is where they believe free will comes in, at this point, in which the finite man is found by the Eternal God and he has that choice to believe on Christ or to waste away in that sin. 


We often get so caught up with the sovereignty of God that we fail to realize that he saved the world with Love....... Christ (yes, the Lamb of God sent to take away the sins of the world).  Not with might.


I know a guy that is going to school (like you gabe), and he often calls me a fundie and the like..... but I found one of His posts interesting.


_Nate_


Just to let you know, what you just described is not THE doctrine of predestination. That's one particularly strong Reformed interpretation of the doctrine. 

Most Christians believe in predestination, but most (including many in the Reformed tradition) don't think that the doctrine has to do with God picking out ahead of time, by nothing other than divine decree, which individuals go to heaven and which go to hell. 

I don't believe in the heinous interpretation you put forward, and not because I don't like the idea of God being in full control of my life. I don't believe in it because it is in opposition to the picture of God painted by the Gospels.


It sounds like you have the same sorts of psychological problems that lead many to posit such a view of God. You seek your security in a heavenly defender who can rule by brute strength, because you are insecure about your own strength. 

Such a view of God is firmly grounded in human sinfulness. Humans praise those who can rule by might. By claiming to be on the side of an almighty God, and by claiming to be made in His image, you associate yourself with the strength and power that your sin nature craves. 

God's revelation shows us that your thoughts are sin, because God conquered sin through an act of love, not might. Christ won the day by weakness, not strength. His weakness is His strength; love is a weakness, and God is love. But by being weak, love has power. God has power by the power of love. Being the creator, He can rule with brute strength, but the cross shows us that He does not choose to. The cross makes us wonder whether God ever rules by force; it calls us to reconsider every act of God in the Bible and question whether God really acted out of any power other than love. 

It takes a much stronger God to rule without force than it does to rule with it. Ghandi was a greater warrior than Samson, and Jesus a greater general than Caesar. The God of the Bible, the God who suffers limitation and risks failure, is a mightier God than the gods of humanity's fantasies."

[Edited on 4-2-2005 by ABondSlaveofChristJesus]


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 3, 2005)

High views of man lead inevitably to low views of God. 

The loose "reformed" people this guy's talking about are the ones in churches with a reformed history, but none of the doctrines. 

This guy thinks people who know they need an almighty Savior have psychological problems. I'll be really honest: people like this who are so self-consciously against the gospel of full and free grace are in danger of their souls. I always hold out hope that their faith is better than their theology, but the percentages drop way off when a person gives such strong evidence that the light that is in him is darkness--how great is that darkness!


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 3, 2005)

I should say, Tim,
If the quote above is off the web, you need to post a link to the original. That's PuritanBoard policy. And also, we want to avoid board-wars, so we need to be careful about how we use and criticize other material that was never intended for our dissection. It's a bit different with blog material and public articles, although we still require links. The latter stuff is "published" formally or informally, and is thus fair game.
Okay?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Feb 3, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus_
> I don't believe in the heinous interpretation you put forward, and not because I don't like the idea of God being in full control of my life. I don't believe in it because it is in opposition to the picture of God painted by the Gospels.


Which God is that? The one in which Jesus calls the Pharisees vipers? Or the one whom states that the parables were intended to hide the truth from those whom God did not wish to save? Or perhaps the picture of God plainly telling them, they don't believe because they are not His sheep? 



> It sounds like you have the same sorts of psychological problems that lead many to posit such a view of God. You seek your security in a heavenly defender who can rule by brute strength, because you are insecure about your own strength.


Rightly so! I have no strength. I can only boast in Christ and what He has graciously done for me and in me! Romans 5:6, For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 



> Such a view of God is firmly grounded in human sinfulness. Humans praise those who can rule by might. By claiming to be on the side of an almighty God, and by claiming to be made in His image, you associate yourself with the strength and power that your sin nature craves.


Does this guy not believe that God is almighty? Has he ever read Psalm 2 or Psalm 110? Or Isaiah 63? How about Acts 5? 
Does this guy not claim to be His image? Too many straw men. He's contradicting himself in teh argument. First he accuses us of holding to an almighty God beause of our own weakness, then accuses us of assoiating ourselves with power and strength be claiming to be His image? Which is it that we claim? Power or weakness? 



> God's revelation shows us that your thoughts are sin, because God conquered sin through an act of love, not might.


Read Isaiah 63 again.


> Christ won the day by weakness, not strength. His weakness is His strength; love is a weakness, and God is love. But by being weak, love has power. God has power by the power of love. Being the creator, He can rule with brute strength, but the cross shows us that He does not choose to. The cross makes us wonder whether God ever rules by force; it calls us to reconsider every act of God in the Bible and question whether God really acted out of any power other than love.


Huge misunderstanding! Just what was accomplished on the cross???? Jesus Christ took the punishment of God's wrath and justice, His full strength against sin, as a substitute for us. In the cross, we see mercy and strength, love and wrath, united in God exercising his full might against sin on Christ, that he might be justly merciful to those whom Christ represented. This guy is talking like a liberal in his explaining of the cross. Is God holy and just? Does He really mean what He says that man is under His wrath for sinning against Him? 



> It takes a much stronger God to rule without force than it does to rule with it. Ghandi was a greater warrior than Samson, and Jesus a greater general than Caesar. The God of the Bible, the God who suffers limitation and risks failure, is a mightier God than the gods of humanity's fantasies."


Again, the liberalism is sneaking in. Ghandi was not a Christian and contributed absolutely nothing to the Christian cause. We are to love our enemies, absolutely. We conquer our enemies through love, sure. But it is our example, coupled with the grace of God working in those whom we interact which makes our example bear fruit. Apart from God changing the heart of our enemy, our example only brings about hatred and persecution. And just what is Christ going to do when He returns again???? Is He going to give all these enemies hugs? No, he will conquer them, and cast them in hell by His own power. 

There's just too many fundamental issues here this guy is mistaken on to productively interact at all.


----------



## Augusta (Feb 3, 2005)

Oh my. That is just awful. I would be in some serious prayer for that guy.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Feb 4, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ABondSlaveofChristJesus_I don't believe in the heinous interpretation you put forward, and not because I don't like the idea of God being in full control of my life. [Edited on 4-2-2005 by ABondSlaveofChristJesus]



And there you have it. 

Prov. 16:1, 4, 9, 33
Daniel 4:35

Looks like we got another Romans 9er here.....


----------

