If God is not willing that any perish, then why do men perish?

[Skandelon]

Originally posted by npetreley:
C'mon Arminians/Pelagians. Is it that obvious that you do not deny God is saying this to men? The Sovereign LORD says, "I do not desire that any of you perish. Nevertheless, not what I desire but thy will be done."

Nick, has it ever occured to you that it may be God's desire for us to choose to worship Him of our own free will? If we don't the Bible says the stones will cry out which in your system of theology wouldn't be a bit different than our crying out.

Do you desire your children to love you? Of course you do, but is that something you want to make them do or is it something you want them to choose to do? What about your wife? Would you have wanted to have to irresistably force her to choose to marry you, or would you have wanted her to respond to you and choose you on her own?

Has it ever even crossed you mind that maybe, just maybe God wants the same from his creation? Could it be that is why he uses names like "Father" and "Children" or the "Bride-groom" and the "Bride of Christ" to illustrate our relationship to Him? Just think about it.

 

[Ian Major]

Skandelon said
God's desires and his sovereign will are not the same. He desires you to obey him, but he obviously hasn't sovereignly willed for that to occur.

Strange to say, I believe Skan and Nick are both right on this. It's just that they are speaking about the other of the two wills of God, the general will regarding all men and the special will toward the elect.

Skan's quote above is absolutely correct and it is important we identify which of the wills we speak of. God desires all of His creatures to obey Him, but He has sovereignly chosen to cause only some to do so.

It is this latter 'will' that Nick seems to be speaking of, implying by his opening statement the foolishness of thinking God submits His sovereignty to man's will.

Yet Skan is right to point out that God sovereignly wills to leave His desire/will for all men to go unfulfilled.

However, I think 2 Peter 3:9 is not speaking of the general will of God, but of His special will. His delay in bringing the End is to ensure the conversion of all the elect.

In Him

Ian

 

[Skandelon]

Ian,

While I appreciate your objectiveness in dealing with my words I must disagree with your conclusion that 2 Peter 3:9 is speaking of God's sovereign will. Why?

1. The context is not limited to believers but it includes the "ungodly men" who are condemned on the day of judgement as evidenced in the previous verse:

2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

It is the day of judgement and the condemnation of the ungodly that God is holding off and "perserving". Its not that he is slack in keeping the promise of condemning the ungodly but that he is patient with us, the ungodly ones, because he desires for us to be saved.

2. Why wait for yourself? Why would God be patient with an elect person? Why would he wait for him to believe when it is He who causes the belief? Why would he patiently seek for them to repent when it is He who sovereignly determines that moment? You dogma clouds the clear meaning of this text by suggesting that God is not waiting for ungodly men everywhere to believe and be saved, but instead he is waiting on himself to cause certain elect individuals to believe in Him unto salvation.

3. Other passages such as Matt 23:37 and 1 Tim. 2:4 seem to support the clear meaning of 2 Peter 3:9 as being the "general will" of God.

 

[npetreley]

However, I think 2 Peter 3:9 is not speaking of the general will of God, but of His special will. His delay in bringing the End is to ensure the conversion of all the elect.

I agree. But I was deliberately speaking from the perspective of the Arminians/Pelagians here. They quote 2 Peter 3:9 to ¨prove" that God is not the kind of God who would elect only certain people to be saved because He does not desire that any should perish -- therefore (they reason) He must be offering salvation to all men.

This, by the way, is a classic illustration of what Pastor Larry is talking about in another thread. The scripture itself does not in any way address election or free will, yet Arminians/Pelagians "reason" free will into it in order to "prove" their view. That requires that they ignore or explain away all the explicit scriptures about election which demand no "reasoning" whatsoever to understand.

But back to the topic at hand.

Assuming God really does desire to save all men, then it is one thing to say that God sovereignly wills to leaves His desire unfulfilled for some men, and quite another thing to say He leaves it up to men to decide -- and that simply RESULTS in only some men being saved.

The former harmonizes both with God's sovereign will and election. God may have the desire to save all men, but He has, according to His own good pleasure and for reasons which supercede His desire to save all men, elected only some to be saved. Nevertheless, those who get saved are saved according to God's will, not man's will. They are born from above "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

The latter says that God abdicates His throne when it comes to salvation. He says to men, "I desire that you all be saved, nevertheless, not my desire but Thy will be done." Arminianism/Pelagianism requires that man's will takes precedence over God's desires. Arminians/Pelagians try to get around the blasphemous implications with doubletalk like "it is God's sovereign will that God elevated man's will above His own". But absurdities like this aside, what do we call it when man believes His will is so important that God submits to it? Anyone? Anyone?

 

[Skandelon]

Originally posted by npetreley:
what do we call it when man believes His will is so important that God submits to it? Anyone? Anyone?

Once again Nick your kicking your straw man. We don't believe that WE are the ones who have determined that it is by our response to God's revelation that we will be justified. IT WAS GOD'S DETERMINIATION THAT WHEN ABRAHAM BELIEVED IT WOULD BE CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. It was the sovereign God's will that men make that choice and be judged by it. It was God's determination that we would be judged by our response to his word. Your not debating us, you debating people who believe that man's will is more important than God's will. We don't believe that.

You presume that anyone who believes that it is God's sovereign will for men to freely respond to his revelation that is tautamount to believing man's will is more imporant than God's. That is absurd. If it is God's sovereign will for men to freely respond and his desire that all will respond in faith unto salvation and that is what is actually happening then God's sovereign will is being accomplished. I don't know what is so difficult about that for you. I mean, its one thing to just disagree but just not to understand it seems beneath you.

 

[Ian Major]

Skandelon said
While I appreciate your objectiveness in dealing with my words I must disagree with your conclusion that 2 Peter 3:9 is speaking of God's sovereign will. Why?

Yes, some Calvinists also hold your understanding. It is possibly the correct one, but I feel the case is weightier on my side.

1. The context is not limited to believers but it includes the "ungodly men" who are condemned on the day of judgement as evidenced in the previous verse:

But the elect whom God is long-suffering toward were at that moment unsaved, ungodly.

2. Why wait for yourself? Why would God be patient with an elect person? Why would he wait for him to believe when it is He who causes the belief? Why would he patiently seek for them to repent when it is He who sovereignly determines that moment? You dogma clouds the clear meaning of this text by suggesting that God is not waiting for ungodly men everywhere to believe and be saved, but instead he is waiting on himself to cause certain elect individuals to believe in Him unto salvation.

The waiting is for the appointed time of their conversion. God had appointed the moment of their birth and of their re-birth. Millions would not come to that time until some 2000 years would pass - you and me, for instance.

That brings me to a key objection to your view of who the 'us' are. Why would God delay the moment of the End in order to give all a better chance to believe (as your understanding of it is), when that very delay produces many more unbelievers who have perished in their sins. If the End had come in the apostolic era, it is estimated that about 250 Million souls would have been involved. Today, it's about 6000 million, not to mention all who have perished in between. Even accepting at face value the numbers given for Evangelicals, that is a vastly greater number of unsaved facing the Judgement today than at the time of Peter's writing.

If it was God's intention to see the maximum number saved, then it has all back-fired dramatically.

BTW, I'll be out of town until Friday, DV.

In Him

Ian

 

[Ian Major]

Npetreley said
The latter says that God abdicates His throne when it comes to salvation. He says to men, "I desire that you all be saved, nevertheless, not my desire but Thy will be done." Arminianism/Pelagianism requires that man's will takes precedence over God's desires. Arminians/Pelagians try to get around the blasphemous implications with doubletalk like "it is God's sovereign will that God elevated man's will above His own". But absurdities like this aside, what do we call it when man believes His will is so important that God submits to it? Anyone? Anyone?

I fully agree, my brother. They may say God's sovereignty is not diminished, but if one leaves the ultimate decision with man, then God is at their mercy. God's love and purpose, in the Arminian scheme, could have been rendered void, with no-one believing. God could have thrown a party and no one come, to use a modern idiom. But of course, this is not only a modern idiom - it is the very one Christ spoke of in the parable of the Great Supper, Luke 14. As it shows, when God throws a party, He makes sure it is filled.

In Him

Ian

 

[UMP]

Why? Because that's the way God wants it. Do I understand it? Not really. Do accept it? Yes, by the Grace of God, like a child.

Matthew 13:11
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

Matthew 11: 25-26 "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight."

 

[Skandelon]

Originally posted by Ian Major:
That brings me to a key objection to your view of who the 'us' are. Why would God delay the moment of the End in order to give all a better chance to believe (as your understanding of it is), when that very delay produces many more unbelievers who have perished in their sins. If the End had come in the apostolic era, it is estimated that about 250 Million souls would have been involved. Today, it's about 6000 million, not to mention all who have perished in between. Even accepting at face value the numbers given for Evangelicals, that is a vastly greater number of unsaved facing the Judgement today than at the time of Peter's writing.

If it was God's intention to see the maximum number saved, then it has all back-fired dramatically.

You presume that I believe God's sovereign will was to save the maximum number possible and somehow has failed. His desire is to see all saved, just has he desires you and I do always obey Him...that doesn't always happen does it? His sovereign will is that men make that choice to love and worship him in spirit and in truth. He seeks such men, it doesn't say he MAKES them, it says He seeks after them. If it were just a matter of him MAKING them then the stones would do the job. He wants them to choose whom they will serve, that is his sovreign will. He is patient with all men by allowing them to continue to live even in gross sin and rebellion so that they may see the error of their way and turn from their unbelief. That is the hope Paul and the other authors of the scripture express and its a hope that Calvinists really can't have for them. Calvinists can hope God does something, but they can't hope for the man to do anything as the scripture seems to do.

 

[gabe]

Ian, you said:

"God desires all of His creatures to obey Him, but He has sovereignly chosen to cause only some to do so."

Could you explain this to me? Doesn't the Bible say that God works all things according to His desire?

 

[Ian Major]

Skandelon said
You presume that I believe God's sovereign will was to save the maximum number possible and somehow has failed. His desire is to see all saved, just has he desires you and I do always obey Him...that doesn't always happen does it? His sovereign will is that men make that choice to love and worship him in spirit and in truth. He seeks such men, it doesn't say he MAKES them, it says He seeks after them. If it were just a matter of him MAKING them then the stones would do the job. He wants them to choose whom they will serve, that is his sovreign will. He is patient with all men by allowing them to continue to live even in gross sin and rebellion so that they may see the error of their way and turn from their unbelief. That is the hope Paul and the other authors of the scripture express and its a hope that Calvinists really can't have for them. Calvinists can hope God does something, but they can't hope for the man to do anything as the scripture seems to do.

No, I wasn't talking about His sovereign will, just the ' not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance' of 2 Peter 3:9. You seemed to argue that this will refers to all men without exception - so that must mean God's postponement of the End was to ensure the maximum results. But the results are awful, if that is the case. Billions more end up lost than if God had ended it all in the apostolic age. But if the purpose was rather to ensure the salvation of all the elect, then it will fully succeed.

And Calvinists DO look to man to do something - every elect person WILL repent and believe. God doesn't do it for them, rather He gives them the sort of heart that will do so.

In Him

Ian

 

[Ian Major]

Gabe said
"God desires all of His creatures to obey Him, but He has sovereignly chosen to cause only some to do so."
Could you explain this to me? Doesn't the Bible say that God works all things according to His desire?

Sure. I believe the Scripture reveals to us that God has both an expressed will and a hidden will, or maybe better, a general and a sovereign will. I don't remember how the theologians express it.

Anyway, the former is His desire, the latter his desire that He enforces. So God desires that all His creatures love and obey Him; but He makes that certain only for whom He chooses.

In Him

Ian

 

[Skandelon]

Originally posted by Ian Major:
Skandelon said
You presume that I believe God's sovereign will was to save the maximum number possible and somehow has failed. His desire is to see all saved, just has he desires you and I do always obey Him...that doesn't always happen does it? His sovereign will is that men make that choice to love and worship him in spirit and in truth. He seeks such men, it doesn't say he MAKES them, it says He seeks after them. If it were just a matter of him MAKING them then the stones would do the job. He wants them to choose whom they will serve, that is his sovreign will. He is patient with all men by allowing them to continue to live even in gross sin and rebellion so that they may see the error of their way and turn from their unbelief. That is the hope Paul and the other authors of the scripture express and its a hope that Calvinists really can't have for them. Calvinists can hope God does something, but they can't hope for the man to do anything as the scripture seems to do.

No, I wasn't talking about His sovereign will, just the ' not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance' of 2 Peter 3:9. You seemed to argue that this will refers to all men without exception - so that must mean God's postponement of the End was to ensure the maximum results.

Well Ian, that all depends on what you consider being the maximum result. The scripture says that the message will be preached in all nations and then the end will come. If God's desire from the beginning was to find as many people in the world who were willing to worship him by Faith then I would say this is what is being accomplished by waiting. The result in waiting was that you and I had an opportunity to be born and respond in faith to God's revelation. Thank God for that.

Like Calvinist I too believe God recieves glory in his justice of the wicked, so I don't think judgement is going to be some kind of failure simply because there are more goats than sheep, afterall Christ warned us the road was broad that leads to destruction. The real point is that those people had all they needed to respond which is why they are responsible (response able). Your system undermines that.

 

[Ian Major]

Skandelon said
Well Ian, that all depends on what you consider being the maximum result. The scripture says that the message will be preached in all nations and then the end will come. If God's desire from the beginning was to find as many people in the world who were willing to worship him by Faith then I would say this is what is being accomplished by waiting. The result in waiting was that you and I had an opportunity to be born and respond in faith to God's revelation. Thank God for that.

Skan, I see your point about how waiting would give opportunity to more people to believe. That makes sense for your system.

But it does not make sense of the text. The reason given there was 'not willing that any should perish'. If they hadn't been born, they would not have perished. The longer the delay, the more perish.

Also, any point in our history would give the same type of result as will the Last Day - many will have their opportunity cut short. What then would be the point of delaying the End, especially when such delay will only produce greater numbers of unbelievers? How will that accomplish His desire that none should perish?

But if the desire refers to the salvation of all the elect, the delay will indeed enable that to occur.

In Him

Ian

 

[npetreley]

What then would be the point of delaying the End, especially when such delay will only produce greater numbers of unbelievers? How will that accomplish His desire that none should perish?

But if the desire refers to the salvation of all the elect, the delay will indeed enable that to occur.

Extremely well put, Ian. The context of the verse makes it clear that any refers back to "lonsuffering toward us", which are the elect. But I like how you point out that the verse does not even make sense when "any" is applied to everyone without exception.

 

[Skandelon]

God desires for all to be obedient but that doesn't always happen. God's desire is not alway a part of his sovereign plan. This verse is merely expressing the fact that God doesn't delight in the perishing of unbelievers, it doesn't mean it won't happen. The verse is also expressing his delight in seeing people saved which is accomplished with each passing year. It happens because they refused God, not because God refused them...that is where you miss the boat.

Neither of our systems measures the success of God by the number of people who actually end up believing as compared to the number of people who perish. We both blame the reprobates for their lost condition, I just believe that you system can't really blame them justly because they are being judged by a word they are unable to respond to.