Introducing Christian Doctrine by Millard Erickson

Hi Paula, and we didn't mean to give Tim a hard time. It was his idea. :laugh:

 

Would it be called holiness? And how then would it be defined in undefined time?

 

When I die, it would be discovered that I only used 1% of my brain. :laugh:

 

I don't think it would matter what we called it. It would still be God's absolute perfection. In order for God to be God by definition.... nothing he creates will equal His perfection. He could not be God if something created was His equal. So does it really matter what language says He is? Just thinking out loud.

 

I concur that holiness is an outworking of God's absolute perfection. :thumbs:

 

Since you're only using 1% of your brain, you'll need to go to bed right now. :laugh:

 

Tim, as you well know by now... I am definitely a predestinarian. I hold to pretty much high calvinism. Yet as I teach and preach, I like to explain that if one wants to be found as one who was predestined to pick up their cross and follow Jesus, then by all means, pick up your cross and follow Jesus.... and you will have been found to be predestined to do so. God will have decreed it to happen if you do it! If you don't do it.... then God never decreed it. That seems to harmonize God's sovereignty and the responsibility of man!

 

MY GOODNESS!

I'm gone for a day and this thread takes off like Baptists and noon sharp on Sunday morning! :laugh:

Now I will take some time to read and wade through it all.

 

I agree. I would place it in the same area.

This was pointed out to me a year ago. There maybe something to it, I have not taken the time to check into it. But maybe, just maybe this leads to your relational point below. This is why it is good to study the story line of the Bible as well. What is the over all point of the Bible? Is it good vs evil? Is it God saving man? If you ask 1000 people you will get 1000 answers. But the answers I favor the most is something that shows that God indeed loves His people. I'm not trying to put an election spin on this. Calvinist and no-Calvinist should agree that all the glories of heaven and blessings found in salvation is for those that are saved. God wants to have a relationship with His people and desires to train them, bless them and bring them home. And this shows over and over in His attributes and actions toward the saints.

attribute...wouldn't you say?

 

I'm not so sure I agree with you, except maybe in principle here.

The primary is not God's sovereingty (IMO) for a couple of reasons.

1. God's attributes are ascribed in relation to His creation.
ex. God is Omnipotent and therefore the entirty of His being is abosolute power personified. It is who He is (His essense)

Now with that in mind, God was omnipotent before creation because it is not defined through it's interaction with creation as His attributes are. However, Soveriengty is a different issue since it is specific to that which is created and therefore has a defintate relationship with God's and toward His creation. God, through His omnipotence will be sovereign over that which He creates but if it is (as it was in the beginning) just God and God alone, to what was He sovereign or sovereign over?

However, God being omnipotent is so even before His creation becuase it is the essense of who and what He is.

Therefore (IMO) the primary is not God's soveriegnty but His omnipotence from which flows His soveriegnty.

2. Sovereignty flows from ones power.
ex. A king is only soveriegn if he has the power to maintain it.

Therefore, we must ascribe God's omnipotence to be the defining factor for God's claim of soveriengnty. He is not soveriegn because He says so (ok He is but .. ) He is because He has the absolute power to prove His claim.

 

This thread has gone so far so fast, and over the weekend, and when I've been asleep here in Japan, that I haven't been able to contribute much. But I want to say just one thing about the attributes of God.

I haven't seen where His love has been listed as an attribute on this thread, but "God is love." That is another thing He essentially is. He loves because He is love. I believe His love and holiness should counterbalance each other in our lives.

If we emphasize love at the expense of holiness, we become liberal: Good Lord, good devil, everybody's good and God would never send anyone to Hell. If we emphasize holiness at the expense of love, then we become heartless and legalistic, emphasizing our narrow view over the salvation of souls and loving our neighbors and enemies.

There, I got a word in edgewise!

 

Great Study Guys & Gals. Very good food for thought.

 

John,

Way back on this fast moving thread I pointed out that in Erickson's Christian Theology, he lists love as a subset of the goodness of God.

 

deleted by me

 

John,

I did list love in my little list. Other things could be added to that list for sure. I want to build on something you said. Sometimes the word "perfections" is used in place of attributes. I kinda like this idea. Maybe one should use both words here. But here is why I like the word perfections.

God is not just love. Just as God has divine essence that make Him God, love has the very essence that all love comes from. That of course is God.

We would not know of love if it were not God that shared love to mankind. Any love that we have and know about, comes from God who is not just loving, but is love itself. This is why I think perfections is a good word to use with attributes. God is not just love, but is perfect love which all love flows from.

 

I would say so, yes. The reason is because soveriegnty flows from His omnipotence.

Now technically, and I think Jauthur (James) already touched on this, there is no real biblical classification of Gods attributes as specific sets and subsets.

However, we can note that many attributes are manifested only through their interaction with creation and others that are without the need for creation to manifest it.

So in one sense they are all truly there but some can only be seen through God's interaction with His creation.

 

AMEN!
Love is one of the Omni's of God. Some classify it as omnibenevlent and some as God's goodness. I personally think Omnibelevolence better exemplifies the personinfication God intened to be understood.

 

I used to not like the word 'perfections' in place of attributes because it would kinda fuzzy my grasp of it. But I agree with you now, because it wasn't the word per sey that made it fuzzy but understanding of what it was conveying.

I agree with you also that both should be used as they are explained that the grasp of the student learning them be more complete. Good point!