Like Button

Friday, January 29, 2016


It's interesting to look over the responses to the stuff I write. It's interesting what produces the most responses.
Not to us, O LORD, not to us, But to Your name give glory Because of Your lovingkindness, because of Your truth. Why should the nations say, "Where, now, is their God?" But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases. (Psa 115:1-3)
Controversial. "God does not do whatever He pleases. We get in His way." Or something like that.
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)
Not controversial. Except that no one seems to notice that if this is saying that it is God's will that no one should perish, then it is saying that God fails because some perish. No one seems to notice that problem.
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
Not controversial. "We like that 'God loved the world so much' thing." Except that's not what it says. And we barely understand "love" anymore as the Bible uses the term. But, hey, Jesus said it, so it must be true.
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3:16-17)
Controversial. "Well, of course, 'God-breathed' doesn't mean that it's actually the reliable, inerrant, infallible Word of God. That's just a phrase." Never mind that this "questionable claim" is the basis for the certainty that the prior claim ("God so loved the world") is accepted.

I don't understand what people who classify themselves as Christians classify as controversial.


Eternity Matters said...

"I don't understand what people who classify themselves as Christians classify as controversial."

Love it.

Josh said...

Wouldn't you consider all these controversial? You disagree that the plain meaning of some of the passages (the middle two, along with passages like Titus 2:2), means what it appears to plainly mean. Other Christians disagree that the plain meaning of the passage (The first, at least) means what you think it appears to mean.

Josh said...

I meant Titus 2:11 in my previous post.

Stan said...

I didn't mean to imply that there is nothing in Scripture that is controversial. Indeed, the two I listed as "not controversial" are indeed controversial to me. But when "He does whatever He pleases" is taken to mean "We do whatever we please" and "All Scripture is breathed out by God" is taken to mean "The Bible isn't a reliable book", I'm baffled. Further, when the plain meaning of texts like these do not collide with any other Scripture and are explicit, why would anyone take them to mean something different?

On the two that I listed as "not controversial", taking the first to mean "It is God's will that no human being should perish" as is often the case collides with other Scripture, and taking the second to mean "God loves the world so much ..." disagrees with the text itself. (Taking Titus 2:11 unexamined would put it in the former category.)

Josh said...

To say that God can do whatever he pleases, does not explicitly mean that humans can't do whatever they please. It just means that IF humans can do whatever they please, it is because it pleases God to allow that.

If you say it is impossible that "We can do whatever we please", aren't you the one defining what God can or can not do?

Stan said...

Humans, biblically, cannot do whatever they please. See the example of Abimelech, whom God prevented from sinning (Gen 20:6). When humans do what they please, it would have to be that God is pleased to allow it. See Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:22). Neither of these are in disagreement. What is in disagreement is that God (for example) cannot save someone who does not want to be saved.

(I'm not sure about your question in that last sentence. While I did not say "It is impossible that 'We can do whatever we please'" because I don't say that, how does saying that Man can do anything whatsoever that he wants to do reflect on what God can or cannot do?)

David said...

I wonder why there can't at least be agreement that there are often texts on both sides (especially in reference to the posted topics here) that need to be reconciled. There are certainly passages that speak of God doing all He pleases and passages that speak of us thwarting Him, but typically one side or both ignores the passages against their view instead of reconciling then as they need to be. That's why I often side with Stan, he tries to look at both sides presented in Scripture and figure out how they agree (since if they truly disagreed we would have a worthless book instead of the reliable Word of God).