Which is the best result? Redeemed sinners, or perfect men?

You do not give the right choices!

The subject of your OP is redeemed vs perfect men. Your poll is not the same.

Since there is no such critter as a perfect man, that leaves only 'redeemed' and 'unredeemed'. Revelation 20:13-15 After judgment there will be NO UNREDEEMED! So which is better?

 

The unfallen angels give more glory to God than the fallen ones.

God's own will is stated in Gen 2 that Adam and Eve NOT sin.

In Gen 6 God "REPENTS" that He has made mankind because of man's sin.

In Romans 3 Paul condemns the idea that sin is needed to glorify God and to exault grace.

In Christ,

Bob

 

So - if we go back to the "Calvinist future scenario" with this -- should I add "And God said that burning the child and saving the parent was more glorious and praise worthy than simply saving both as unfallen sinless beings"??

Is that "really" where Calvinism goes??

How "instructive"!!!

 

Luke 15:7 - "Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance."

 

No, it's not. How ignorant.

 

The 99 rigteous who need not repentance are like saul in Phil 3 declaring himself "blameless" prior to his conversion.

They were blameless "in their own eyes" and so would not be saved. This means the 99 lost were not giving any glory to God but the 1 who is saved does.

This is NOT a statement about UNFALLEN Angels giving less glory to God NOR a statement that Adam in an unfallen state would not glorify God as much as a sinner saved.

And it is CERTAINLY not a claim that God "needed" wickedness, suffering and death to show how great He is.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I guess the 99 sheep really weren't sheep, or maybe they were also lost sheep but they didn't know that they were lost. Yeah, that must be it.

 

Glory can be quantified? What is the unit of glory?

 

Christ makes this point in reference to the Jewish leaders who claim they need no repentance and are rejecting Christ. (obviously not a claim to Godly perfection on their behalf - from Christ)

Paul hits the same point

In Christ,

Bob

 

Christ makes this point in reference to the Jewish leaders who claim they need no repentance and are rejecting Christ. (obviously not a claim to Godly perfection on their behalf - from Christ)

Paul hits the same point

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]That's a great sermon, but that's not what Jesus was talking about. He was talking about why He ate with sinners, not about whether the Pharisees and scribes were truly righteous or falsely righteous.

The shepherd had a hundred sheep and lost one of them. The other 99 were not lost. If your interpretation is valid then the Pharises and scribes were not lost. Of course we agree that they were lost. Jesus is not addressing that point here.

 

There is no such thing as Perfect man. God knew before He created man, that man was not to be perfect, because he bought failure insurance in the form of "the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world". That same Lamb of God is also called the Word which existed before the foundation of the world. and through which the world came into being.

Furthermore, for man to be perfect, man would have to be made with all the knowledge of God within him, and there would have been no reason for a tree of knowledge of good and evil, or a tree of life, by which man could be seduced into disobedience. But the bible records that both of those trees existed in the Garden.

So there is no such thing as a perfect man! God did not make one!

 

Wes, I honestly think you are just desperately trying to get on the 4,000 post club by throwing up a post without thinking about what you say.
Talk to Larry and see if he can put the 4,000 post club title next to your name so you can slow down and think for a while.

 

Even by your "biblical standards, I still say that God did not make the perfect man. If he had, the first man would not have sinned according to the biblical standards you post!

God made man and called him Good. Good does not mean perfect unless perfection is the standard for Good, and we have no way of knowing whether God's standard for good is "perfect", or simply "suitable for HIS purpose"! In God's creation is it obvious that not everything meets the dictionary standard for perfection. If everything in Gods, creation were perfect, there would be no pock marks on the moon! and meteor craters on the earth, and we would not see comets crashing into other planets in our solar system as we have recently. If it were perfect, none of those collisions would occur. We would not have natural disasters on this planet such as hurryupcanes, earth quakes, tsunami's, fires, volcanos, etc., those are all indications of imperfections. But! They may be quite suitable for God's purposes! and therefore would be called 'Good' by God!

So, I still say that God did not create the perfect man!

Let me add this! If man were perfect we would be unfettered spirit, just as God is unfettered spirit! We would not have a body of flesh to constrain and confine us!

 

Whetstone, again you are quite wrong in your OP queations, which are in response to my words on another thread.

As you are probably aware, I said that no one can believe that God could be glorified in the "fall of man", or even in our sins. What you are asking has no bearing on what I have said, so I don't see the point of using my words in your OP?

 

Whetstone, I can't suggest anything here, as I don't know what you are trying to say. I am saying, contrary to Calvinstic dogma, which says that God has preordained the fall of man to His glory, that, there is no way that God can be glorified in the fall of man. Rather, He is glorified when a sinner turns to Jesus and accepts Him as their Saviour and Lord. Further, Scripture says that God takes not delight in the death of the wicked, then how can He glory in the fall of man? Surely Calvinism makes God the author of sin.