Introducing Christian Doctrine by Millard Erickson

Can you not accept that that is what I meant to say???? Hmmm. Do you really want to get involved in this discussion or are you too sensitive to handle it?

skypair

 

If you meant to say that, then fine. It just establishes the fact that I apparently do know the basics and did comprehend that which I posted.

Sensitive? I am the not the one who is being accusative here. You my friend are the one ascribing to others the inability to comprehend, and apparent lack knowing even the basics. All of which are personal attacks that you initiated and continue to perputate.

Lets continue to keep it civil and enjoy the thread. You asked my 'opinion' and I gave it. I would not encourage ANYONE to 'teach' a postulation, and especially not one I agree with. So my comment was given in accordance with both your request and post. Do I agree with your initial post? Not in the way you presented it there, no. If you clarified much if it later on, and it was in fact more along the lines of Ryrie, Packer and others. Yes. But I could only go on what you posted.

 

Allan,

I enjoyed your post that stated:

I think these points are quite helpful. But, if I may, I would like to remind us all that love is not a hope or a feeling. Biblical love must be demonstrated.

If faith can only be seen/confirmed through actions, then love can only be seen/confirmed through action.

By the way, I do not think it is by accident that the Apostle Paul listed these three in 1st Corinthians 13. A point he made is this: These things (faith, hope, and love) are seen in action, through demonstration.

God’s love for us is seen, not by His words (alone), but by His actions—Christ dying on the cross, for example.

Therefore, just as faith that is not demonstrated through works is “dead,” according to James, Love that is not demonstrated through our actions is equally dead.

I think this is an important aspect of love, that’s why I shared it! J

Blessings to all

The Archangel

 

If God is, indeed, "all Truth," then His emotion, His Holy Spirit, toward "untruth" would "truly" be wrath.

In fact, reading DHunt today, it occurs that God judged all "untruth" on the cross. How so? Hunt said (I don't vouch for it - I only just read it) Christ died for SIN, not SINS.

Think about that propostion. It isn't something you naturally consider -- Christ died in the place of all untruth, not just each individual untruth. Every sin is comprehended by "the lie." He died in the flesh -- where all untruth comes from, BTW. There is not sin in the soul and spirit until it is put there by the flesh!! We are to "die to the flesh" for the same reason Christ did. We are to live in the Spirit for the same reason Christ did.

Where did Paul say the "law of sin" was? In the flesh. We must physically live IN the flesh or die ------ BUT we needn't live TO the flesh, to "the lie," to sin.

All sins are comprehended in The Sin -- untruth, no? The one thing that doesn't fall under the blood is rejecting the TRUTH, right?

Please give me some feekback and not "jeers" here. :BangHead: I'm not vouching for any of this but it does begin to make sense to me.

skypair

 

I do not disagree with it. However, Gods wrath does not supercede God's Love either. They work in unison. Yet it is Gods Love that witholds His wrath 'at present' or even hold back the full extent but does not negate it. And at the same time His wrath at times is also unleashed because of and even in spite of His love (I think I said that right). If His wrath was predominant He could have never love His creation imbued in sin or more specifically chosen to love those who would be and in fact are born in sin. Niether are predominant but both work to manifest the divine nature of God which God has revealed to His creation. He did so that we might know His is both Love and Holy, good and terrible, merciful and just. He can not be one without the other.

Does that make sense?

 

I will give a hearty Amen to that.

God reveals His love in manifested ways, specific to that aspect of love He relegates toward His creation both in general as well as specific.

 

Allan,

Thanks for this quote from Dr. Ryrie:

"Love in God is seeking the highest good and glory of His perfections."

And when this translates itself to the unfolding of the redemption story, we must all agree, that whatever God does, is out of love and for His own glory, for that is love.

 

This is the reason why I bring this up.

For few pages now many claim that no attribute rules over another. Is Gods wrath and Gods love on the same level or does one rule over the other?

 

I would say that His wrath is an outworking of His Holiness, but it's tough to say that one attribute rules over the other.

Aren't we implying that there is a hierarchical structure to the attributes of God, when we reason like that?

 

And this would be my point. Love does not control His wrath.

Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity.

God is in perfect balance.

 

I agree with you TCG.

Scripture does not set forth a heirachical structure in or to the attributes of God.
This to is from Dr. Ryrie "Basic Theology" (it deals with wrath and love, believe it or not)

 

Well, said. Now, that's a lot of theology in one line. :thumbs:

 

No one said that Gods love 'controls' His wrath but that they work in unison.

What keeps Gods wrath from being poured out? Is it not His love?

As I stated previously, they work in unison one with another manifesting the full nature of God together.

So yes, I agree that God is perfect balance.

 

Thanks again. :thumbs:

You know what: This type of sound reasoning by Dr. Ryrie will definitely keep us out of that theological conundrum.

 

Maybe you can help me understand "withhold His wrath". To me this means "rules over". maybe not.

 

Dear Skypair and Allan,
Please be careful of your words and interaction with each other.

Thanks,
bro. Dallas

 

Going back to a few things around emotion as a whole. Sorry, but I missed most of the emotion stuff.


God's love is unchanging just as He is unchanging.

God's love is not regulated on an impulse of emotion but rather by principle of His nature. This principle is that God is a holy God.

I want you to notice this. Holy love is what God has. This is often over looked.

God's love has nothing to do with sin. God's love is found only in truth. Salvation is salvation from our sins. Salvation is not just a ticket out of Hell. We are sinners that have no hope other then to be saved from our sins. God has emotions other then love. Our holy God hates sin and will judge us in our sins.

Again...

Going by the above arguments describing God's love, it is fair to say, that many understate the love of God giving the sinner a false sense that God is okay with his sins. God is in fact love, but God is much more than a big teddy bear that hugs us. God's love is pure, holy and will never fail. God's love is based on His will and covenant that He made with His people. Not understanding God's love will distort the way in which we apply or look for love in our own life.

 

The words I used there did not illistrate my meaning very well.

It is not that His wrath is subordinate to His love and therefore is 'withheld' or 'ruled over' BY His Love. I was trying to illistrate that both attributes work in unison one with another, being that both are active and yet cooperate one with another. That while His wrath is present and active, it can not subvert nor subordinate the Nature of God's Love. And while Love is active neither does it subvert nor subordinate the Nature of Gods Holiness. His wrath will be set forth and appeased, just as His Love will be.

Both work together in unison being both active and cooperate one with another.

As you stated "God is in perfect balance."

 

Agreed but no one has said that God's love has anything to do with sin.

There is no question that God's love is 'pure, holy, and will never fail'. However the 'will never fail' is based upon the purpose that God determined for it to accomplish. Now if God has distinctions to His love as I stated earlier, each distinction has it's own purpose to which each will fulfill it's purpose and never fail.

My question from your post is this however: Are you contending that God only has one aspect of His Love and that is His covenant Love (for His people) only?

I will agree with you in stating that "not understanding God's love will distort the way in which we apply or look for love in our own life."