God's desire

[JonC]

God is perfect, yet not all men are saved. This is a contradiction that is not argued well by your position.

No, it is not a contradiction.

Scripture states that God is not pleased to destroy the wicked, yet Scripture also states that God will destroy the wicked. This does not make God less than perfect (in fact, it is exactly the opposite).

How do you believe it does?

 

[JonC]

You have significant contradictions in you.

You have misplaced the accusation. You mean it to be Scripture contradicts itself, or God contradicts Himself. But the real contradiction is in your mind.

It is not pleasing to God to destroy the wicked. Yet God will destroy the wicked.

Jesus did not desire to suffer the cross. Yet He desired to do the will of the Father which included suffering the Cross.

To you this means God is not perfect, but why? Because you are philosophizing rather than accepting God's Word, and that is why you see Scripture and God at odds.

 

[AustinC]

You have misplaced the accusation. You mean it to be Scripture contradicts itself, or God contradicts Himself. But the real contradiction is in your mind.

Nope, but that what you have conjured up in your mind.

It is not pleasing to God to destroy the wicked. Yet God will destroy the wicked.

Agreed

Jesus did not desire to suffer the cross. Yet He desired to do the will of the Father which included suffering the Cross.

The Trinity agreed to the redemption of the chosen people through the Promised One who would be God the Son. As a human, Yeshua was tempted by the daunting task required, but He bowed to the Trinities plan for redemption and victoriously followed the will of the Father.

To you this means God is not perfect, but why?

Honestly, you project what is not true upon me.

Because you are philosophizing rather than accepting God's Word, and that is why you see Scripture and God at odds.

This is just a continued projection from your wrong thinking.

Scripture and God are not at odds, unless you teach free will theology, which certainly creates multiple unresolved contradictions that many free will proponents refuse to grasp.
I can understand this as I once was a free will contradictionist who desperately made claims that seemed right, but could not be resolved by scripture alone.

 

[AustinC]

No, it is not a contradiction.

Scripture states that God is not pleased to destroy the wicked, yet Scripture also states that God will destroy the wicked. This does not make God less than perfect (in fact, it is exactly the opposite).

How do you believe it does?

AustinC wrote:
God is perfect, yet not all men are saved. This is a contradiction that is not argued well by your position.

God is perfect. It grieves God that man will not humble himself under God's Supremacy. He must lovingly judge this rebellion and damn humans to hell. "But God...even while were dead in our trespasses and sins...made us alive with Christ."
God, by grace alone, saves His chosen, adopted children, and justified them by faith alone.
Synergists create contradictions when they require pre-conditions and human cooperation in order for God to save His children.

Jon, the problem is with your thinking, not with God.

 

[JonC]

Nope, but that what you have conjured up in your mind.


Agreed


The Trinity agreed to the redemption of the chosen people through the Promised One who would be God the Son. As a human, Yeshua was tempted by the daunting task required, but He bowed to the Trinities plan for redemption and victoriously followed the will of the Father.


Honestly, you project what is not true upon me.


This is just a continued projection from your wrong thinking.

Scripture and God are not at odds, unless you teach free will theology, which certainly creates multiple unresolved contradictions that many free will proponents refuse to grasp.
I can understand this as I once was a free will contradictionist who desperately made claims that seemed right, but could not be resolved by scripture alone.

No, nothing conjured up in my mind (I assume the sane of you). But you are being inconsistent.

You say that God must desire some remain lost (those who will never believe) or God is not perfect.

But at the same time you say that God's desire is not to destroy the wicked (but He will) and God is perfect.

You need to take some time to decide exactly what you believe (either way) and then defend that position. Right now you are trying to hold onto two conflicting ideas, and both are slipping through your fingers.

 

[JonC]

God is perfect. It grieves God that man will not humble himself under God's Supremacy. He must lovingly judge this rebellion and damn humans to hell. "But God...even while were dead in our trespasses and sins...made us alive with Christ."
God, by grace alone, saves His chosen, adopted children, and justified them by faith alone.
Synergists create contradictions when they require pre-conditions and human cooperation in order for God to save His children.

Jon, the problem is with your thinking, not with God.

No, the problem is not my thinking and the problem is not with God.

You need to defend your idea that God can't desire all be saved if all are not saved, yet God can be absent the desire to destroy the wicked whom He will destroy.

 

[JonC]

@AustinC

I was not projecting upon you the idea that God desiring all men be saved, yet they are not, meaning God is less than perfect.

God is perfect, yet not all men are saved. This is a contradiction that is not argued well by your position.

You agree that God does not desire the destruction of the wicked, yet He will destroy the wicked. But you cannot reconcile it with your faith.

The issue is you are looking at a caricature of God rather than how God has revealed Himself in Scripture.

 

[AustinC]

@AustinC

I was not projecting upon you the idea that God desiring all men be saved, yet they are not, meaning God is less than perfect.

You're certainly projecting

You agree that God does not desire the destruction of the wicked, yet He will destroy the wicked. But you cannot reconcile it with your faith.

Sure I can. God doesn't desire humans to rebel, yet their corrupt nature moves them to rebellion. God justly and lovingly condemns them, yet chooses to redeem those whom He chooses to redeem. It's fully reconciled by scripture. I'm not sure what you're smoking, Jon.

The issue is you are looking at a caricature of God rather than how God has revealed Himself in Scripture.

Not at all. I am seeing the God of the Bible who is entirely Sovereign over all His Creation and does as He desires without asking us for our opinion. God reveals that He has mercy upon whom he has mercy and hardens whom He wills.

Tell me where the caricature lies.

Jon, you have followed the path of man-centered philosophers. I'm not going to follow you.

 

[JonC]

God doesn't desire humans to rebel, .

I agree. God desires all men be saved, that men do not rebel but come to a knowledge of the truth

I do not think you understand the word "project" in your reply (actually, that is apparent in how you use the word).

Saying that God desires that all men come to a knowledge of the truth, that God takes no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked, is not a philosophy. It is what the Bible states.

You are right that God will justly condemn the wicked. You are right that this is not due to a lack of love. You are wrong to think that God desires these to rebel rather than come to salvation.

Paul is making a point that salvation is not just for the Jew (you hint at a truth in your post but you abandon Scripture in the end).

 

[AustinC]

I agree. God desires all men be saved, that men do not rebel but come to a knowledge of the truth

I do not think you understand the word "project" in your reply (actually, that is apparent in how you use the word).

Saying that God desires that all men come to a knowledge of the truth, that God takes no pleasure in the destruction of the wicked, is not a philosophy. It is what the Bible states.

You are right that God will justly condemn the wicked. You are right that this is not due to a lack of love. You are wrong to think that God desires these to rebel rather than come to salvation.

Paul is making a point that salvation is not just for the Jew (you hint at a truth in your post but you abandon Scripture in the end).

Did I say God desires people rebel? Come on, Jon. You are getting all twisted up.
Did I say God takes pleasure in judging the wicked? No. These are all things you are projecting out of your own mind.
I made my case. It's clear you don't actually know what I have claimed as you keep making it up. Keep walking down your rabbit trail, Jon. No one is following, but keep walking.

 

[JonC]

Did I say God desires people rebel? Come on, Jon. You are getting all twisted up.
Did I say God takes pleasure in judging the wicked? No. These are all things you are projecting out of your own mind.
I made my case. It's clear you don't actually know what I have claimed as you keep making it up. Keep walking down your rabbit trail, Jon. No one is following, but keep walking.

No, you didn't. You said that God does not desire that all men believe (which by necessity means God desires that some men rebel).

You are trying to ride a fence and in so doing have a muddled belief.

 

[Van]

You have significant contradictions in you

Where does scripture demand that you must "believe into Christ Jesus?"

Van, I am not responsible for your incapacity to allow all of scripture to interpret one sentence.
Unfortunately I see a handful of people here who cling to one sentence and create an entire doctrine from it, claiming that the one sentence (void of context) means a universal all. The problem you refuse to admit is that your Vanology therefore contradicts itself all over the place since you deny universalism yet embrace it at the same time. You work hard then to try cover up the contradictions with obfuscation.

Falselogy contracts scripture at every turn.
Folks, this poster seems unable to find "eis Christ" in scripture.

Rom 6:3
Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?

Gal 3:27
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.​

Or the verses where God puts people in Christ like 1 Corinthians 1:30.

Or the fact John 3:16 says everyone believing "into" (eis) Him.

 

[Van]

Does God desire all people (1 Timothy 2:4) to be saved unconditionally, or only according to His redemption plan?

Since all people are not saved, for example the person headed for swift destruction in 2 Peter 2:1, then God's desire is not unconditionally applied, but conditionally applied, to those whose faith in Christ He credits as righteous faith.

In order to make this possibility of salvation available to all humanity, Christ died as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6.)

 

[AustinC]

God fulfills His desire. As the context provides, people from all nations, tribes, and tongues as well as people from all status groups are chosen to believe.

Unlike free willers who express a God who only foreknows, but doesn't actively choose, I see in the Bible that God is actively causing people to believe.

The issue comes down to who is the cause and who is the effected in salvation.

The Bible is clear. God causes man to be saved and the effect is mans belief that God saved them.

 

[AustinC]

Falselogy contracts scripture at every turn.
Folks, this poster seems unable to find "eis Christ" in scripture.

Rom 6:3
Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?

Gal 3:27
For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.​

Or the verses where God puts people in Christ like 1 Corinthians 1:30.

Or the fact John 3:16 says everyone believing "into" (eis) Him.

Keep re-writing the Bible, Van. Your translation is garbage, just so you know

 

[Brightfame52]

Does God desire all people (1 Timothy 2:4) to be saved unconditionally, or only according to His redemption plan?

Since all people are not saved, for example the person headed for swift destruction in 2 Peter 2:1, then God's desire is not unconditionally applied, but conditionally applied, to those whose faith in Christ He credits as righteous faith.

In order to make this possibility of salvation available to all humanity, Christ died as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6.

That verse applies only to all of God's Elect and they all shall be saved and come to know the truth.

 

[Van]

Keep re-writing the Bible, Van. Your translation is garbage, just so you know

Ever wonder why these folks know what the bible does not mean, but cannot say what it does mean.

 

[Van]

That verse applies only to all of God's Elect and they all shall be saved and come to know the truth.

This is a false claim.

Does God desire all people (1 Timothy 2:4) to be saved unconditionally, or only according to His redemption plan?

Since all people are not saved, for example the person headed for swift destruction in 2 Peter 2:1, then God's desire is not unconditionally applied, but conditionally applied, to those whose faith in Christ He credits as righteous faith.

In order to make this possibility of salvation available to all humanity, Christ died as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6.)

 

[AustinC]

This is a false claim.

Does God desire all people (1 Timothy 2:4) to be saved unconditionally, or only according to His redemption plan?

Since all people are not saved, for example the person headed for swift destruction in 2 Peter 2:1, then God's desire is not unconditionally applied, but conditionally applied, to those whose faith in Christ He credits as righteous faith.

In order to make this possibility of salvation available to all humanity, Christ died as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6.)

Your constant misunderstanding of faith and God judging faith afterward instead of seeing faith as righteous because God graciously gave it as a gift is your huge obstacle that you cannot overcome. Consequently you get things all twisted up and wrong. You keep asserting falsehood (Vanology) that God does not assert. I keep praying God knocks some sense into you.

 

[AustinC]

Ever wonder why these folks know what the bible does not mean, but cannot say what it does mean.

I know the Bible, as translated by Van, is no better than the Bible that Thomas Jefferson translated.