Why is predestination wrong

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

He will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain. All liars will have their place in the lake of fire. NO adulterer, or fornicator shall inherit the kingdom of Heaven.

Only because the adulterer and fornicator chose to disobey God.

Except for this little thing called “predestination.” Apparently, it’s ok if God looks down the corriders of time, and sees that someone chooses Him, and so He predestinates that person to enter the kingdom of Heaven, as long as you don’t have to say that He looks down the corriders of time, and sees that someone rejects Him, and so He predestinates that person to enter Hell.

You can’t have it both ways.

More than that, unlike the human judge, God has the power to transform and reform this man. He has and does give this man the grace to change.

PEPCIS:

But if the man refuses, then he must go to hell.

benedictus:

Yes. But as you very well put it, it is the man who refuses

. It is not that God is not offering him the grace. The grace is offered. Man refuses.

Don’t get ahead of yourself! I was just “agreeing” to point out that those who refuse God’s salvation end up in Hell.

I am imperfect. One man might choose to send him to hell, and another might choose to let them go. God is the PERFECT JUDGE.

benedictus:

A perfect MERCIFUL AND LOVING God.

Pope John Paul II made a huge mistake when he stated that hell was “not a punishment imposed externally by God.” The pontiff declared that the Bible “uses a symbolical language” to speak of Hell. But as I have pointed out here, and elsewhere, that is stretching the limits of credible Bible exegesis.

So yes, a perfect MERCIFUL, LOVING, GOD WHO WILL “not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.” A MERCIFUL, LOVING, GOD WHO DECLARES that “all liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.”

 

[guanophore]

You would do well to mind your own mirror, and stop worrying about others. As you said, there are moderators for that.

I will repeat what I said to Non. There are far more members and posts than there are moderators. It behooves us all to spur one another on to good deeds and civility. As a forum supporter, I have an obligation to follow the rules, and to report when they are not followed.

 

[guanophore]

No, I don’t think so. I’ve mapped it out quite well from your own statements. If your statements don’t match up to Catholic dogma, then perhaps you ought to change what you say.

I would be delighted! Please show me the statements I have made that the Catholic Church teaches we can “work our way into heaven”. Unless you can do that, I think the “map” is only in your own mind.

I am accusing Catholics of something that they teach. If it doesn’t conform to Catholic dogma, then THEY need to change, not me.

It is something you mistakely believe that the Church teaches.
However, you may be right. If you could accept that the Bible is a Catholic Book, and that everything in the NT represents 100% Catholic Teaching, then you might be able to realize that Catholics believe we are saved by grace, through faith, and that it is an unmerited Gift of God.

I am simply going by what all of you collectively have stated. benedictus has repeatedly stated a belief in works-righteousness, as well as SHW.

I have no doubt you perceive it this way.

If you need to MAINTAIN your salvation, it is no different than bringing yourself salvation, since salvation is NEVER complete (according to your own testimony) UNTIL YOU ARE DEAD, and your works have been balanced out to see if you did enough good to make it into heaven.

No, pepcis. No one here has said this except you. Look at it this way. If I shoot someone in the head with a bullet, they will likely die. The bullet caused their death. That bullet cannot, equally, cause life. This is the logical error you are making. You are assuming that, since participation in the works that God has prepared before hand that we should walk in them keep us in His grace, that we are “earning” salvation. This makes about as much sense as the bullet creating life, or sustaining life.

Hardly. SHW says: “We must endure to the end of our lives “in Christ” in order to actually receive our “promise” of eternal life.”

And you believe that those who don’t endure will recieve the promise?

Actually, there is, because that’s the ONLY WAY that you can make the Scriptures say something that they don’t say. Maybe you don’t agree with SHW and benedictus that you must work to get to heaven?

The only work that is efficacious where heaven is concerned is the working out of our salvation because God is within us, willing and working His good pleasure. IT is no longer we that live, but Christ that lives within us. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ, in God. Therefore the works that we do, that He prepared before hand that we should walk in them, are worked out in us by grace, through faith, not of ourselves, lest any man should boast.

 

[NonCatholic]

But that is precisely my point. Your “concept” of election is the one that is faulty not “election” itself.

Your “concept” or the way you understand election is the one that comes up with the monster god.

Wel also believe in election, but the way we understand election does not in any way come up with a monster god.

The Biblical concept versus your interpretation as all of you like to throw around.

 

[NonCatholic]

I would be delighted! Please show me the statements I have made that the Catholic Church teaches we can “work our way into heaven”. Unless you can do that, I think the “map” is only in your own mind.

It is something you mistakenly believe that the Church teaches.
However, you may be right. If you could accept that the Bible is a Catholic Book, and that everything in the NT represents 100% Catholic Teaching, then you might be able to realize that Catholics believe we are saved by grace, through faith, and that it is an unmerited Gift of God.

I have no doubt you perceive it this way.

No, pepcis. No one here has said this except you. Look at it this way. If I shoot someone in the head with a bullet, they will likely die. The bullet caused their death. That bullet cannot, equally, cause life. This is the logical error you are making. You are assuming that, since participation in the works that God has prepared before hand that we should walk in them keep us in His grace, that we are “earning” salvation. This makes about as much sense as the bullet creating life, or sustaining life. What he is saying is that any true works for God are the RESULT of receiving irrevocable saving grace through faith in Jesus; it is a gift of God least any Catholic should boast. This is not a loud boast, this is a boast that says I contribute a little and God contributes and together we get there. If someone suggests they can turn away from the hand of God, assuming they are in God’s hand, let them be anathema.

And you believe that those who don’t endure will recieve the promise?

The only work that is efficacious where heaven is concerned is the working out of our salvation because God is within us, willing and working His good pleasure. IT is no longer we that live, but Christ that lives within us. We have died, and our lives are hidden with Christ, in God. Therefore the works that we do, that He prepared before hand that we should walk in them, are worked out in us by grace, through faith, not of ourselves, lest any man should boast.

**It is all about a works righteousness for Catholics here; only they aren’t allow to call it that. Many just do not recognize it. For example, they are taught water baptism removes sin and is required for salvation; when the Scriptural truth is that baptism of the Holy Spirit, a different baptism, is required…big difference. Anyone can be sprinkled or dipped in water in the name of Jesus and the other only God can do the true baptism into Jesus that produces a regenerate heart and a new man.

Just like “venerating” Mary is not praying to Mary because they can’t call it what it is; and calling Mary of the Catholic Church a co-mediatrix, which is pure blaspheme; but to recognize and act upon it would be equivalent to denying the Catholic faith. So we keep praying for God’s grace and mercy.**

 

[PEPCIS]

But you did not answer my question, would you send your daughter or son to eternal damnation if you have the power to give them the grace to change? I would really like an unequivocal answer from you, personally.

I can’t, and won’t, answer the question because it is invalid.

God does not give power to EVERYONE to believe. That was a notion which was taught by Pelagius in the 3rd and 4th century which the Catholic Church condemned at the Council of Carthage (418) as Heresy.

benedictus:

Until you know what unconditional love means it will be hard to imagine a God who loves us UNCONDITIONALLY. But a good place to start is that Christ died for us while we were sinners. Not when we were good. When we were sinners. He died for the sinful world.

1. 
   *]God does not love “unconditionally” and the Bible does not teach that.
   *]Christ died for “us” (that would be the elect) while we were still sinners.
   *]Christ died for the elect ONLY.
   

   Either way, it’s the same. Your hell just isn’t as “bad” as the hell of the Bible.

   

   benedictus:
   

   So you are saying that being away from God is not terrible enough?

   
   No. I’m saying what the Bible says: that hell is a real place that all of God’s enemies will reside in for eternity.
   
   
   benedictus:
   

   I cannot conceive of anything more terrifying and more abject, than a place/state without God.

   Of course you can. The Bible spells it out. Being separated from God, PLUS being in torment for eternity.
   
   
   benedictus:
   

   If that is the way you view it, then God for you is not enough. If God is ALL for you then you would realize that to lose God is to lose ALL. Nothing could be worse than that. And that is hell.

   Sorry, that doesn’t make sense to me. God is all for me. But since I cannot lose what I cannot gain, and I cannot keep what I can’t control, then I have nothing to worry about - because God does it all for me.

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

That is an excellent observation, Nancy. (Wo)Man cannot be saved outside of Grace. Good works do nothing toward salvation, but are a result of it.

If that is true that means that once you are “saved” or as you say it “born again” then that means you cannot do evil. You can only do good.

No, it just means that you cannot lose your salvation. The Catholic Church believes that if you sin after you are saved, that you must do penance - repent and confess, and perform some act of contrition which is deemed an appropriate punishment by some church official. This has come to mean, typically, reciting a set number of Hail Marys or Our Fathers.

Only after performing the sacrament of penance is one brought back into right standing with God and the Church.

But this goes against much of what is taught in the Bible regarding the avenue of salvation, and the means of standing right with God.

But to answer your question, yes, you can sin after you have been saved, but you will answer for your sins at the judgment. God promises us that “if we confess our sins to Him, that He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Hay I’m considered about the dumbest person on this forum but even a dummy knows Jesus died for All. Free men and slave,rich men and poor,good and bad.I was taught Baptist but I don’t remember the way you explain it.So Ben, do you see why now? I’m non denominational? Nancy

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

God’s desires are not God’s will. Therefore, “all men” will NOT be saved. Of course, you probably believe that all men will EVENTUALLY be saved.

Let me get this straight. You are now saying that God desires something but He does not actually WILL it.

Of course. God desires that all men would be saved, but He only wills for His elect to be saved.

God also desires that ALL men would obey Him. Why do they not? Because, as you say, free will. I say it is due to His discretion.

benedictus:

Why would He not Will it if He desires it?

It is in His plan. Who am I to know the mind of God? I can only tell you what He has revealed to us in His Word.

I didn’t intend to say that God ever changed His design, and I think I have already cleared that up in our other discussion.

benedictus:

You may not have intended to say it but that is what you said. So now we are clear that He did not change his design.

No. Man changed His design.

benedictus:

But I am still in the dark as to where you got the figure of 6000 years.

All I meant by that was that before God made the world (about 6,000 years ago) that He determined that there would be a way of salvation. He already knew that Adam would sin, and He provided a means of sacrifice that would reach back in time to Adam.

 

[DD2007]

Why is predestination wrong?

It’s not wrong. It is true.

Romans 8:28-31

[28] We know that in everything God works for good with those who love him, who are called according to his purpose.
[29] For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren.
[30] And those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.
[31] What then shall we say to this? If God is for us, who is against us?

 

[PEPCIS]

"PEPCIS:

Here are a couple of observations:

1. Jesus says that He has been given authority over all men, and that those men whom He gives eternal life to will NEVER perish, and that once they are given to Him in His hand, that no one could ever possibly snatch them out of His hand.

It doesn’t say “They never ever get into God’s hand unless they are going to be saved in the end.” That’s saying the OPPOSITE of what Christ said.

What I said is not in opposition to what the verse said.

That’s ridiculous. Of course what you said is in DIRECT opposition to what the verse said.

Christ: “I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.” (John 10:28)

SHW: “They might perish if they do not endure to the end. Satan can possibly snatch them out of His hand.”

SHW:

I am giving more details since I studied other scriptures pertaining to this subject and my conclusion is based on all of these verses, not just the one verse you keep quoting.

Then it is incumbent upon you to show how those other verses can change what Christ said to mean something that He NEVER said.

Christ says that they are placed in His hand, and once they are placed there that God protects them from any who would try to snatch them out of His hand.

SHW:

I agree

with what Christ states.

You might agree that this is what Christ states, but you disagree that He really means that.

SHW:

I disagree with you as to how they get into His hand in the first place. Christ does not state how this happens in this one verse.

Now you’re setting up a straw man. While we may disagree as to HOW they get in His hand, this IS NOT what we are debating right here. We have been debating ONCE THEY ARE IN HIS HAND, CAN THEY LOSE THEIR SALVATION.

You claim that they can. I claim that they cannot.

You say that if men work hard all their lives, and if they are lucky

, that their good works will place them in Jesus’ hand. By your reckoning, if men are placed into Jesus’ hand, that they can pluck themselves out by not performing well. If they are influenced by the devil, the devil can snatch them out of God’s hand.

SHW:

Luck has nothing to do with it.

Sure does. If I sin a mortal sin, and then I die before I get a chance to obtain absolvence, and perform penance, I’m SEVERELY out of luck.

SHW:

No one can pluck themselves out of God’s hand. Once you are in God’s hand, you cannot be plucked out.

You’re getting a bit quacky on me. :banghead:

You’ve already said that a person can lose their salvation by not maintaining a sinless life, interspersed with the cycle of sin and penance.

SHW:

But our disagreement is that I believe that after God foresaw with His foreknowledge every act of ours for our entire lives on earth before we were born, that our future free will actions determined whether God placed us into His hand in the first place. He predestined us to eternal life as a result of His foreknowledge of every event and action of our life.

For sure, we disagree in this area. But that does not give you carte blanche to proclaim that someone can lose their salvation, or that they MUST WORK to maintain it.

SHW:

It is true that all those who have been given to the Son will endure to the end. What we disagree on is God’s criterion for giving them to the Son in the first place. Once God gives them to His Son, they are saved forever.

Then how can they lose their salvation? Why bother doing good works if you “are saved forever”? You’re not being consistent in what you teach. See, the issue is not HOW you get into God’s hand, though that is the purpose of this thread. The issue that you and I have been going round on is whether you can lose your salvation, which is what you have been teaching.

SHW:

1 Peter 1:2 “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:”

What did God foresee in His foreknowledge that made Him decide whether to predestine some persons for eternal life?

You’re putting predestination in the verse that doesn’t teach about it, and then trying to form a question about predestination regarding this verse that doesn’t talk about it.

This verse talks about the elect being foreknown by God. If you want to know about how God predestines, and the Ordo Salutis, then you will have to go to another Scripture, like Romans 8.

 

[PEPCIS]

"SHW:

All Scripture is true. But not all of the truth about a subject is necessarily in each passage. These letters (epistles) were written as a supplement to oral teaching, not as a substitute.

PEPCIS:

What kind of rubbish is that?

1. 
   *]These Scriptures are BOTH speaking of the same subject of the salvation of men.
   *]All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine, Reproof, for Correction, for Instruction in Righteousness." (2 Tim. 3:16) You cannot relegate some portions of Scripture to a lesser status of “oral teaching” that is somehow not as important as other passages of Scripture.
   

   All Scripture is profitable and useful. All Scripture is true.

1. 
   Yeah, except when it doesn’t agree with what you say.
   
   
   SHW:
   

   The problem is the interpretation of Scripture.

   No, the problem is not trying to say something that the Scriptures don’t say. You keep on saying that Christ doesn’t say that no one can be snatched out of His hand, and then come back to tell me that you agree that no one can snatch them out of His hand. Now you are telling me that the problem is with interpretation???
   
   I think that you’re finally running out of tradition.
   
   
   SHW:
   

   Who has the authority to interpret Scripture when there is disagreement? The Church. (Matthew 18:15-18) The Church has final authority.

   The “Church” is not the Roman Catholic Church, but the body of Christ in a local area. In spite of the multitude of sects, the Body of Christ still agrees on much. This is no different than the several dioceses of churches with the RC faith.
   
   
   SHW:
   

   If a person refuses to listen to the Church, he is to be treated as a pagan or a tax collector according to Jesus.

   This passage of Scripture deals more with discipline than it does interpretation of Scripture.

 

[PEPCIS]

You don’t get it at all.

What I am saying here is that based on your utterances on this thread, based on your posts, if you follow the logic of everything that you have said, the god that you painted with your words is a psychopath.

If you go through my responses, all that I have been trying to show is that you have a very erroneous image of God.

So if I call the god you describe in your post as a psychopath, it is only because that is how you painted him to be.

You described him. I only put an appropriate label.

You don’t get ME at all. I understood you perfectly. If you choose to speak in those terms, I won’t say anything more. I speak for myself when I state that I will not try to denigrate God by saying that you don’t worship Him. I won’t exchange the God that you worship for a "g"od that you imagine.

I believe that in trying to speak about the God that you worship as a little “g”, that I denigrate Jehovah. If I really believe that you worship Jehovah, then I won’t try to make disparaging comments about Him by referring to Him as little “g”.

The Bible teaches us that [SIGN]"Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. . .If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also. (I John 4:11, 20, 21)[/SIGN]

This means that I MUST speak of God the same way that I would speak of you - in love. If I speak of God disrespectfully, then I speak of you disrespectfully, and vice versa.

I am NOT trying to judge you. I am convicted of this as a sin in my heart, and I repent of it. Thank you for understanding. :hug1:

 

[guanophore]

The Biblical concept versus your interpretation as all of you like to throw around.

Everyone intprets what he reads and hears. We all read with our own framework. Catholics are honest about that framework. It sounds as if you believe you don’t have one, which is one of the most dangerous frameworks.

When the eye is sound, the whole body is full of light.

What he is saying is that any true works for God are the RESULT of receiving irrevocable saving grace through faith in Jesus;

Yes, I understand this.

it is a gift of God least any Catholic should boast.

Did you seem to hear any Catholics around here boasting about their good works? Finding good works meritorious, justifying, and sanctifying does not equate to “boasting”.

This is not a loud boast, this is a boast that says I contribute a little and God contributes and together we get there.

I am not so sure that this is the best way to render it. When it is presented this way, it sounds as if the part we contribute is also not under grace. For example, you have stated that believers should be baptized because it is an ordinance. Would you say that cooperating with baptism is you "contributing a littel, and God contributes a little, adn together you get it done? Does that make it a ‘work’ about which you could boast?

If someone suggests they can turn away from the hand of God, assuming they are in God’s hand, let them be anathema.

Are you now writing your own scripture?

It is all about a works righteousness for Catholics here;

Apparently you perceive it that way, and there does not seem to be anything that we can say that is able to convince you that we have died, and our life is hidden with Christ in God. It is no longer we who live, but Christ, who lives in us.

I guess other Christians have the freedom in Christ to live this way, but if one calls oneself a Catholic, one cannot?

only they aren’t allow to call it that.

I think it is misleading, since there is not, in fact, any such things. There is no way to be saved by works, so it is a contradiction in terms.

Many just do not recognize it.

I will concede this point. There are many Catholics who have a deficient understanding of grace. I used to be one of them.

For example, they are taught water baptism removes sin and is required for salvation;

Yes. This is what we have received from the Apostles.

when the Scriptural truth is that baptism of the Holy Spirit, a different baptism, is required…big difference.

There is no difference to the Apostles and those they trained in the faith. They taught that there was no separationbetween the Spirit, and the water of baptism. That is why they called it the “washing of regeneration”.

Anyone can be sprinkled or dipped in water in the name of Jesus and the other only God can do the true baptism into Jesus that produces a regenerate heart and a new man.

Yes, I agree. Jesus is the baptizer. When we are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and HS only God can truly wash the soul, sealing it with the HS.

Just like “venerating” Mary is not praying to Mary because they can’t call it what it is;

I don’t believe I have ever called it anything else. Prayer is supplication. I ask all good prayer warriors for their prayers - those that are still here, and those that have gone before me in the faith.

and calling Mary of the Catholic Church a co-mediatrix, which is pure blaspheme; but to recognize and act upon it would be equivalent to denying the Catholic faith.  So we keep praying for God's grace and mercy.

Non, your anti-Catholic rhetoric is getting you far afield from the topic. The theological discussion about mediatrix is not even Church teaching.

Would you consider having dispute about what Catholics really believe, instead of your preconceived erroneous ideas about what we believe?

 

[guanophore]

You don’t get ME at all. I understood you perfectly. If you choose to speak in those terms, I won’t say anything more. I speak for myself when I state that I will not try to denigrate God by saying that you don’t worship Him. I won’t exchange the God that you worship for a "g"od that you imagine.

I believe that in trying to speak about the God that you worship as a little “g”, that I denigrate Jehovah. If I really believe that you worship Jehovah, then I won’t try to make disparaging comments about Him by referring to Him as little “g”.

The Bible teaches us that [SIGN]"Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. . .If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also. (I John 4:11, 20, 21)[/SIGN]

This means that I MUST speak of God the same way that I would speak of you - in love. If I speak of God disrespectfully, then I speak of you disrespectfully, and vice versa.

I am NOT trying to judge you. I am convicted of this as a sin in my heart, and I repent of it. Thank you for understanding. :hug1:

Great post PEPCIS! You are a great role model for all of us in this! :clapping: :dancing:

 

[SHW]

That’s ridiculous. Of course what you said is in DIRECT opposition to what the verse said.

Christ: “I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.” (John 10:28)

originally posted by SHW: “They might perish if they do not endure to the end. Satan can possibly snatch them out of His hand.”

 

[benedictus2]

LOL You’re a peach! You tell me that words don’t matter, and now you tell me that they do? Which is it?

 

[firstmode]

I believe that God calls all. Scripture explicitly tells us that he desires that all be saved - thus for this statement to make sense, he must make salvation possible for all. This is consistent with the constant urging in the Hebrew scriptures and New Testament for people to repent and seek God. Sadly, a small percentage will respond to the movement of the Holy Spirit.

Blessings,

Brian

I agree. Just look at these verses:

Romans 11:33 (New International Version)
Doxology
33Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and[a] knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!

Acts 17:26-28 (New International Version)
26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28’For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

Romans 1:18-23 (New International Version)

God’s Wrath Against Mankind
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

 

[benedictus2]

First off, thank you for using bigger fonts!

For sure, God does hate sin. “Oh, do not do this abominable thing that I hate!” (Jeremiah 44:4) And Proverbs list seven things that the Lord hates. (Proverbs 6:16-19) Two of those things that God hates are “a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren.” Those are PEOPLE that God hates, not just the sin itself.

But fast forward to the New Testament. Christ died for us while we were still sinners.

**When he died for us while we were still sinners, **St Paul did not say: except for the liars and the one who sows discord among brethren”.

Christ died for ALL sinners. He did not die just for adulterers, or those who did not honor their father and mother. He died for all sorts of sinners. Liars and those who sow discord among brethren included.

And it is precisely the graces that flow from His life, death and resurrection that enable these men to stop being liars and stop sowing discord among brethren.
You cannot claim that God hates sinners because of a verse when the New Testament says otherwise.

If God hated sinners He would have left us to our fate and not gone to the extent of dying on the cross for us.
Who among us can claim not to have lied at any one time in their life? So are we all now condemned because God hates sinners.

If you consider yourself saved, are you now saying that you have not sinned? If you have sinned, then by your own statement God hates you too. If God damns those He hates then you are damned.

If God hates sinners, there is no hope for salvation for any of us, because His Son would not have come to save us from sin.

So how do you reconcile this verse from Proverbs with the entire message of the NT.

 

[benedictus2]

I like the way that John Gerstner puts it, when he says:

““Repent or Perish” forces people to ponder seriously the popular slogan, “God hates the sin and loves the sinner.” Is a necessary repentance consistent with “God loves the sinner?” If God loves the sinner while he is alive, it is strange that God sends him to hell as soon as he dies. God loves the sinner to death? Loves him to everlasting torment?”

Yes, it is strange if God did send the sinner to hell. But as I have said time and again, God does not send us to hell. Please get that right. God does not send us to hell. We send ourselves to hell.

This is where our difference lie.

You keep evading the importance of free-will in any understanding of predestination. God loves the sinner while he is alive so that He will change. Until the very last moment, God calls the sinner to repentance. That is why it is very important that we realize that, that God is calling us to repentance.

God loves Him even then but He cannot override our free will. Life or death is the choice. God is saying choose life.

Why should it be that God cannot love with an everlasting love?

Wrong question. God loves with an everlasting love.

Why and how does He shut his love off for those who have died without repenting?

Wrong question again. He does not. Man turns away from God’s love, God does not shut his love off. God is love. If He shuts His Love off then He is no longer God.

Can they not repent in the next life when it suddenly becomes clear to them?

There is no repentance after death. This side of eternity is our only chance at repentance.

Gerstner continues:

"God is perfectly displeased with the sinner.

Gerstner is wrong because God is not perfectly displeased with the sinner. Althought from our own sinful vantage point, He ought to be. But He is not.

Gerstner is projecting unto God his own displeasure with sinners. He is making God into his image.

When Jesus was confronted with the adulterous woman, he did not condemn her. Rather, He loved her enough to defend her from those who would stone her. But it does not mean that her sins are okay. He loves her enough to say “Go and sin no more” because the wages of sin is death and He did not want her to die.

The sinner hates God, disobeys God, is ungrateful to God for all His favors, would kill God if he could. He is dead in trespasses and sins. (Eph.2:1) “The thoughts and intents of his heart are only evil continually.” (Gen.6:5) He is the slave of sin (John

8:34

), the servant of the devil, (Eph.2:2)

True but God loves him all the same. If this were not so, you would not have these conversion stories of people you would write off as evil and yet who have turned their lives around , thanks to God’s grace.

If God hated them, He would not have given them His grace to change.

As God says:

"I hate them with a perfect hatred.” (Ps. 139:22)

As God said as He hung dying on the cross [sign]“ **Father forgive them for they know not what they do”. **[/sign]

If God loved everyone with the same love, then “Whom the Lord loves He chastens.” (Heb. 12:6,7) would apply to everyone!

Yes, yes, yes! But chastening is not damnation.