-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
All attributes of God
- Thread starter billwald
- Start date
Ray Berrian
New Member
Calvinists push aside the truths about the attributes of God when they say yes God can damn the majority and only save His elect; in this way they deny the justice of the Lord which is one of His attributes. Another attribute that they kick out of the theological arena is the perfect and non-partial love of God toward all of His lost creation.
But, then what value are His Divine attributes when we can push the erring ideas of friar John Calvin.
But, then what value are His Divine attributes when we can push the erring ideas of friar John Calvin.
Ray Berrian
New Member
You said, 'Arminians/Pelagians tend to forget that wrath is an attribute of God. God
cannot make known his attribute of wrath unless there are objects of wrath.'
Ray: We are more, at least I am more Arminian in theology not Pelagianism. Nevertheless, we know well about God's attribute of Divine wrath. That is why we witness and preach. Those who receive Christ [John 1:12] have had this wrath removed from their eternal future. Read Roman 8:1. 'There is, therefore, NOW no condemnation to those who are in Christ.' The rest of this verse is in the KJV but it is not to be found in copies of the Greek manuscripts.
cannot make known his attribute of wrath unless there are objects of wrath.'
Ray: We are more, at least I am more Arminian in theology not Pelagianism. Nevertheless, we know well about God's attribute of Divine wrath. That is why we witness and preach. Those who receive Christ [John 1:12] have had this wrath removed from their eternal future. Read Roman 8:1. 'There is, therefore, NOW no condemnation to those who are in Christ.' The rest of this verse is in the KJV but it is not to be found in copies of the Greek manuscripts.
The OT view of God is that of an authoritarian all powerful judge sitting on a chair handing out judgements. The OT's focus is on sovereignty. An absolute ruler, and we are his subjects. When we get to the NT, Jesus gives us a revolutionary view: that of father, who sees us as not little subjects, but as his own, his children. We're no longer subjects in a kingdom, but children in a family. Now, this doesn't negate God's attribute of sovereignty. However, it gives us a greater understanding of His wrath. No longer are we subject to the anger of a ruler, but we are molded by the anger that a parent has for his child. Big difference.
Ray Berrian
New Member
npetreley,
I agree with your statement as in your last post.
You said, 'Ray, Johnv, you both missed my point. God cannot make known His
attribute of wrath unless there are objects of wrath.
I agree with your statement as in your last post.
You said, 'Ray, Johnv, you both missed my point. God cannot make known His
attribute of wrath unless there are objects of wrath.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
God does not "NEED" to reveal himself as the great roaster of His creatures in Hell. The fact that He has to do it-- is only because the wages of sin is death and some choose sin (like Lucifer, 1/3 the angels, Adam and Eve) -- it is a fact of the wicked heart NOT a NEED on God's part to show how He roasts people.
In Christ,
Bob
In Christ,
Bob
Ray Berrian
New Member
Bob Ryan,
You said, 'God does not "NEED" to reveal himself as the great roaster of His creatures
in Hell. The fact that He has to do it-- is only because the wages of sin is
death and some choose sin (like Lucifer, 1/3 the angels, Adam and Eve) -- it
is a fact of the wicked heart NOT a NEED on God's part to show how He
roasts people.'
Ray: I agree with you. God is not looking for an excuse to damn people; it is His will to save the lost ones. [John 3:16] This, however, is not to deny the fact that He will become wrathful to all who ignore of reject His Son, Jesus. The attribute of His justice and wrath will be in full gear at the Great White Throne Judgment, which is the judgment for all lost sinners. [Revelation 20:11]
As you know the Judgment Seat of Christ is the evaluation time and a time of rewarding His people. This judgment is for redeemed saints only. [II Corinthians 5:10 & I Corinthians 3:11-15]
Regards,
Ray
You said, 'God does not "NEED" to reveal himself as the great roaster of His creatures
in Hell. The fact that He has to do it-- is only because the wages of sin is
death and some choose sin (like Lucifer, 1/3 the angels, Adam and Eve) -- it
is a fact of the wicked heart NOT a NEED on God's part to show how He
roasts people.'
Ray: I agree with you. God is not looking for an excuse to damn people; it is His will to save the lost ones. [John 3:16] This, however, is not to deny the fact that He will become wrathful to all who ignore of reject His Son, Jesus. The attribute of His justice and wrath will be in full gear at the Great White Throne Judgment, which is the judgment for all lost sinners. [Revelation 20:11]
As you know the Judgment Seat of Christ is the evaluation time and a time of rewarding His people. This judgment is for redeemed saints only. [II Corinthians 5:10 & I Corinthians 3:11-15]
Regards,
Ray
Ray Berrian
New Member
This passage is dealing only with the saints, the people of God. There is no hint that this is speaking to or toward sinners.
'2 Tim 2:20-21
20 Now in a large house there are vessels of ... wood and earthen ware
some to honor and some to dishonor,
21 therefore if a man cleanse himself of these things he WILL BE a
vessel of honor...prepared for every good work.
Dr. Berrian
'2 Tim 2:20-21
20 Now in a large house there are vessels of ... wood and earthen ware
some to honor and some to dishonor,
21 therefore if a man cleanse himself of these things he WILL BE a
vessel of honor...prepared for every good work.
Dr. Berrian
First, your debate tactic of depicting God's wrath as "roasting people in hell" is sophomoric.
Second, it is entirely Biblical for God to DESIRE to display His wrath and make Himself KNOWN through His wrath.
Ezekiel 7:4
I will not look on you with pity or spare you; I will surely repay you for your conduct and the detestable practices among you. Then you will know that I am the LORD.
Ezekiel 35:9
I will make you desolate forever; your towns will not be inhabited. Then you will know that I am the LORD.
Romans 9
22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
He cannot do this without having vessels of wrath upon which to display His wrath.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Then consider this -- for How Calvinism seeks to show God "revealing Himself" in arbitrary wrath vs arbitrary selection.
5 and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:
“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. This scenario simply removes that “luxury” in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).
You have sealed the deal in terms of "confirmation".
In Christ,
Bob
5 and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:
“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. This scenario simply removes that “luxury” in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).
The salient point that your statements ADD to this is that God not only does not CARE to save the loved one -- He actually takes JOY in roasting them as it reveals a key and essential part of Himself that would not otherwise be seen.
You have sealed the deal in terms of "confirmation".
In Christ,
Bob
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Hmm - Ezekiel?
Ezek 18
How fitting for the God who claims "He is not WILLING for ANY to Perish but ALL to come to repentance".
So when the MANY of Matt 7 reject ALL of that - they are roasted in the lake of fire - "2nd death" but not because God is joyfully toasting them as Calvinists sometimes speculate.
In Christ,
Bob
Ezek 18
How fitting for the God who "So Loved the WORLD that He gave..."
How fitting for the God who claims "He is not WILLING for ANY to Perish but ALL to come to repentance".
So when the MANY of Matt 7 reject ALL of that - they are roasted in the lake of fire - "2nd death" but not because God is joyfully toasting them as Calvinists sometimes speculate.
In Christ,
Bob
How hypocritical you are, Bob Ryan ! How holier-than-thou your attitude is ! You accuse Calvinists of having a God joyful in roasting His own creation, as if He was the One who sinned against them, and not they against Him, yet what does your revered prophet teach, and to which you said yes you believed before they even dunked you into your waters of baptism ?
Investigative Judgment !!
A judgment where those who have trusted in Christ, and whose sins are supposed to have been covered, are having their conduct , their walk examined to see if they were worthy of the atoning sacrifice of Christ !
Yet you write many times on this board that there is no salvation but by grace ! What kind of grace. God's Grace ? Or Ellen White's grace.
Here is what your prophet says:
John 10:13 - John 10:14 (NIV) 14“I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
Now, tell us, according to what you were taught and which you accepted as gospel truth or else they would not have baptized you, what will the end of the judgment be for these who supposedly
'already trusted Christ as their Savior' ?
Are they going to be sent to hell ?
Where in the Bible does it say that God's people MUST walk worthy of the atonement in order to be fully entitled to its benefits ?
Investigative Judgment !!
A judgment where those who have trusted in Christ, and whose sins are supposed to have been covered, are having their conduct , their walk examined to see if they were worthy of the atoning sacrifice of Christ !
Yet you write many times on this board that there is no salvation but by grace ! What kind of grace. God's Grace ? Or Ellen White's grace.
Here is what your prophet says:
The Bible answers this question and tells us that Jesus knew who were his sheep 1810 years before 1844. On the other hand EGW tells us that Jesus needed the I J to determine who they are. Did Jesus forget who were his sheep since the first century and then have to schedule an 1844 I J to refresh his memory?
John 10:13 - John 10:14 (NIV) 14“I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
EGW states that Jesus entered the most holy place in 1844 to "perform the closing work of atonement" and to make an atonement for all "who are shown to be entitled to its benefits". There is not one Bible text that tells us that Jesus entered the "Most Holy" in 1844 or that his atonement was only for those "entitled to its benefits."
Now, tell us, according to what you were taught and which you accepted as gospel truth or else they would not have baptized you, what will the end of the judgment be for these who supposedly
'already trusted Christ as their Savior' ?
Are they going to be sent to hell ?
Where in the Bible does it say that God's people MUST walk worthy of the atonement in order to be fully entitled to its benefits ?
Here's a $10,000.00 challenge from a former SDA for any of the members of your cult.
HERE'S THE LINK
Ray Berrian
New Member
Bob Ryan,
When I was in seminary studying for my B.D. degree we had a text that included SDA in along with Mormonism, Christian Science and JW'. Our professor had reps from each of these cults brought in to tell their tale.
I always believed that SDA were the closest to Christian truth, though they probably have things in them that I do not personally believe. I read Ellen G. White's book, one of them years ago. In that text I found no error, as I recall.
I believe according to what their rep said and another older man that I repeatedly talked to while taking my daughter to a high school to teach her how to swim, that he was a born of the Spirit Christian. Moreover, I would rather be in his boots at death than a Reformed Baptist shoes who accuse the Lord Jesus of damning who ever He wants along with the other four points of Calvinism.
It is not 'sophomoric' to reevaluate the theory by putting into words what people think is truth. Yes, the theory is not worthy of a child's consideration. According to Calvinists God has decided in eternity past who He is going to put on the 'chicken rotisserie' to fry in conscious torment throughout all of eternity in Hell.
It's bad enough to know that all who wilfully refuse Christ entrance, will experience the last sentence of the above paragraph.
In theory when you read the Bible it sounds remotely plausible, but when you put, 'muscle, nerves, tissue on the skeletal theory, it becomes a horrid and pitiful mental conception at best.
I recall that 'the older gentleman's eschatology was wrong, but then so are the Reformed Baptists wrong about their view about Amillennialism.
Plus, I think we should be worshipful everyday and not merely on the Sabbath or Sunday morning at 11:00 a.m.
Your thoughts?
When I was in seminary studying for my B.D. degree we had a text that included SDA in along with Mormonism, Christian Science and JW'. Our professor had reps from each of these cults brought in to tell their tale.
I always believed that SDA were the closest to Christian truth, though they probably have things in them that I do not personally believe. I read Ellen G. White's book, one of them years ago. In that text I found no error, as I recall.
I believe according to what their rep said and another older man that I repeatedly talked to while taking my daughter to a high school to teach her how to swim, that he was a born of the Spirit Christian. Moreover, I would rather be in his boots at death than a Reformed Baptist shoes who accuse the Lord Jesus of damning who ever He wants along with the other four points of Calvinism.
It is not 'sophomoric' to reevaluate the theory by putting into words what people think is truth. Yes, the theory is not worthy of a child's consideration. According to Calvinists God has decided in eternity past who He is going to put on the 'chicken rotisserie' to fry in conscious torment throughout all of eternity in Hell.
It's bad enough to know that all who wilfully refuse Christ entrance, will experience the last sentence of the above paragraph.
In theory when you read the Bible it sounds remotely plausible, but when you put, 'muscle, nerves, tissue on the skeletal theory, it becomes a horrid and pitiful mental conception at best.
I recall that 'the older gentleman's eschatology was wrong, but then so are the Reformed Baptists wrong about their view about Amillennialism.
Plus, I think we should be worshipful everyday and not merely on the Sabbath or Sunday morning at 11:00 a.m.
Your thoughts?
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Ray - I attend a good Christian congregation each Sabbath in obedience to the 4th commandment. I also happen to attend a good Christian congregation on Sunday (S.S and the Worship service) because I enjoy the fellowship and at one time my daughterw were working in the nursery there.
That particular church likes to recruit child care from SDA churches since they want to be assured that their hired staff are Christians and are not missing weekly worship services.
I think Walter Martin addressed the issues no cults pretty well in his book Kingdom of the Cults and he also exposed the flaws of the strawmen built up by that Hoekema, Rice. He admitted to the fact that they would "make up their own statement of beliefs FOR SDAs and then shoot down what THEY made up".
Martin's approach to determining the official teaching of SDAs was far better.
Adventists do not teach that those who attend church on Sunday are not Christians and they do not say we "should not be worshipful every day".
It is silly to speculate that God's law requires that we be pagan six days a week and Christians 1 day a week. Salvation is the same today as it was 4000 years ago. The New Birth that Christ spoke of in John 4 BEFORE the cross was as real in the OT as the NT.
Ray - you are right about the fact that there are strong differences among a number of churches on the Millenium, infant baptism, images in worship services, what happens to the bread at communion etc. That is really nothing new.
Each person should study the Bible and then attend the church that they believe provides the best doctrinal case where that case is evaluated SOLA SCRIPTURA.
In Christ,
Bob
That particular church likes to recruit child care from SDA churches since they want to be assured that their hired staff are Christians and are not missing weekly worship services.
I think Walter Martin addressed the issues no cults pretty well in his book Kingdom of the Cults and he also exposed the flaws of the strawmen built up by that Hoekema, Rice. He admitted to the fact that they would "make up their own statement of beliefs FOR SDAs and then shoot down what THEY made up".
Martin's approach to determining the official teaching of SDAs was far better.
Adventists do not teach that those who attend church on Sunday are not Christians and they do not say we "should not be worshipful every day".
It is silly to speculate that God's law requires that we be pagan six days a week and Christians 1 day a week. Salvation is the same today as it was 4000 years ago. The New Birth that Christ spoke of in John 4 BEFORE the cross was as real in the OT as the NT.
Ray - you are right about the fact that there are strong differences among a number of churches on the Millenium, infant baptism, images in worship services, what happens to the bread at communion etc. That is really nothing new.
Each person should study the Bible and then attend the church that they believe provides the best doctrinal case where that case is evaluated SOLA SCRIPTURA.
In Christ,
Bob
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Give me a verse from the Bible saying that election and wrath are arbitrary, and then I'll read the rest of what you have to say. </font>[/QUOTE]Is this where I give you "the text" from Spurgeon? OR where you thinking that the BIBLE said something like that?
My argument as you recall is that the BIBLE makes the ARMINIAN case and Spurgeon makes the Calvinist case.
In Christ,
Bob