Impartial Love

[RICHinCHRIST]

Paul appeared to use parallelism also.

If the "many" in verse 19 refers to the entire human race in the first mention, should we not see the "many" in the second mention as referring to the entire human race also?

[mattrose]

This leaves no room for annihilation.

It sounds like you are ruling out 'annihilation' because it would involve a loving God choosing to end a life instead of giving that life more opportunities to repent. But as someone who does lean towards an 'eventual extinction' position, I view the choice not to repent as a move further away from God who IS the source of life. The sinner is, essentially, cutting himself off from life itself (despite God's willingness to save him). Therefore, I do not find my version of 'annihilation' incompatible with the love of God anymore than I would find a rebellious child incompatible with a loving parent.

wouldn't the greatest act of kindness be to ensure they become reconciled to Himself?... And is not the best thing for sinful humanity to become saved?

The greatest act of kindness is to die for your enemies... to offer forgiveness and love... to invite them into relationship with you. But your words ENSURE and BECOME insist on something that must be chosen in order to be genuine. It is akin to saying, "Wouldn't the most kind thing for God to do be to over-ride their free will and make them love Him?" To which I would answer, no (if the alternative is that they become extinct). Indeed, the best thing for the human is that they become saved, but if they are forced to become saved they are no longer human at all.

The only logical explanation I could find for annihilation is if the sinner still rejects God after death and is unwilling to yield his will to His creator. Anyone so stubborn would be classified as insane, in my opinion. Most people reject Christ out of pure ignorance. I don't think humans are so evil that they would know that Christ is Lord and yet still reject Him. those who reject Him really don't believe that He is Lord. If they were to come to the knowledge of Him being Lord and still reject Him, that would mean they are completely insane. So even the term "rejecting Christ" seems like it misses the mark. Sinners aren't rejecting Christ, they are ignorant of Christ. To reject Christ with full knowledge of who He is is beyond anything I think any rational human being is capable of.

I do think it is possible to know that Christ is Lord and yet still reject Him. I think the Bible specifically speaks of such cases. In any case, I have a book suggestion for you. I couldn't help but thinking, as I read this quote from you, of a book by Jerry Walls titled "Hell: the Logic of Damnation." You seem to like to come at things logically and philosophically. Walls specifically addresses, at some length, this issue of the insanity of a postmortem rejection of Christ. As a spoiler, I will tell you that Walls seems to believe in postmortem opportunity, yet still insists on the logical possibility of eternal misery (and leaves room for annihilation).

[steve7150]

steve7150,

John 5:29 appears to be another case of poetic expression, an antithetic parallel where opposites are contrasted as in "resurrection of life", "resurrection of damnation" (second death). It is listed as such in CF Burney's "The Poetry of Our Lord", a book not written about our subject of discussion. IMO the common translations are correct.








Sometimes Jesus spoke this way and sometimes not but in any event even if it meant death, i would take it as a "separating from God" as in spiritual death.
In fact one of the first definitions of krisis was a "separating" and then the issue is, a separating for what purpose?

[Homer]

Rich,

You wrote:

Paul appeared to use parallelism also.

Romans 5:18
Therefore, as through one man’s offense [judgment came] to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act [the free gift came] to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. (NKJV)

If the "many" in verse 19 refers to the entire human race in the first mention, should we not see the "many" in the second mention as referring to the entire human race also?

Throughout Roman's Paul refers to the issue of Jews and gentiles. Is Jesus for the Jews only? Is God the God of Jews only? Romans 15:7-13 might be seen as a theme for Paul's purpose in the book as a whole:

Romans 15:7-13, New King James Version (NKJV)

7. Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received us, to the glory of God. 8. Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers, 9. and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy, as it is written:

“For this reason I will confess to You among the Gentiles,
And sing to Your name.”

10. And again he says:

“Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people!”

11. And again:

“Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles!
Laud Him, all you peoples!”

12. And again, Isaiah says:

“There shall be a root of Jesse;
And He who shall rise to reign over the Gentiles,
In Him the Gentiles shall hope.”

13. Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that you may abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Yes, Jesus is for all who will come! There is "neither Jew nor Greek".

What the universalist does with Romans 5:18-19 is to ignore the context;

Romans 5:14-19, New King James Version (NKJV)

14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15. But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16. And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17. For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.

18. Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men (both Jews and gentiles), resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men (both Jews and gentiles), resulting in justification of life. 19. For as by one man’s disobedience many (both Jews and gentiles) were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many (both Jews and gentiles)will be made righteous.

For who the "many" made righteous are, see underlined part of v.17.

[jriccitelli]

You seem to be saying that no one, not anyone has received enough light, information or opportunity’ (My quote)

Maybe I needed to rephrase that; Steve, you seem to be saying that not one ‘who has rejected’ Jesus or the gospel has received enough light, information or opportunity.

Q. Why did God put people to death if He wants them to free of being disadvantaged?
A. Maybe for the very reason stated in your question?

In your post you used the word disadvantaged as in ‘disadvantaged by ignorance in this life’. The context of my question was about the people put to death we are told as a direct judgment by God, that is ‘in’ scripture (outside of prophecy we cannot presume why someone dies). The people in scripture could have easily been given more revelation, thus not be ‘disadvantaged by ignorance in this life’ before’ God killed them, or rather than killing them.

They were put to death because they were rebellious sinners, as we all are, but many had the ‘same revelation’ as those not killed, as in Judah and Israel’s case. In the case of those outside Israel or other nations, God could easily have given them revelation also, rather than kill them. They ‘may’ receive a ‘chance’ at repentance and so forth sure, but why were they killed in the first place?

God’s plan of correction could have been easily worked out in this world (assuming they could be corrected) this would be a testimony to Gods love and forgiveness of everybody right?
Or would it give the wrong idea. Rather, I think (as many do) death as a judgment clearly defines by example what God will do to the sinful man, the people who witnessed the events thought so, and so did the NT writers think so as they quote the events from these judgments as what happened as a reminder to fear God, because God is serious and that ‘death’ is the result of sin and rebellion.
Physical death may not be the end of our existence, but it certainly puts the second death into perspective. How many times does God have to put us to death?
I think the first death is enough evidence even for the ‘ignorant’, which of course means ignoring the truth that death can happen, etc. If someone does not repent before the second death, I would think that this is the kind of ignorance’ that God will not put up with, again. What does God say;

“How long, O naive ones, will you love being simple-minded? And scoffers delight themselves in scoffing And fools hate knowledge? 23 “Turn to my reproof, Behold, I will pour out my spirit on you; I will make my words known to you. 24 “Because I called and you refused, I stretched out my hand and no one paid attention; 25 And you neglected all my counsel And did not want my reproof; 26 I will also laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your dread comes, 27 When your dread comes like a storm And your calamity comes like a whirlwind, When distress and anguish come upon you. 28 “Then they will call on me, but I will not answer; They will seek me diligently but they will not find me, 29 Because they hated knowledge And did not choose the fear of the LORD.

Is God waiting for them to repent after a second death?

Never the less, I have stated that scripture speaks of urgency, faith, annihilation, cutting off, blotting out, I never knew you, fire, desolation,tearing, spitting out, the unrepentant, remnants, gardening, bad soil, wicked servants, millstones, animals, goats and sheep, gathering wheat and burning chaff, have you ever seen dry chaff burn?

[jriccitelli]

This would have to do with what God's overall plan was in making man… and then redeeming man to participation in the original plan of ruling with Him (Steve pg.2)

That was interesting, I have a little different concept of Gods purpose in creation of man, not that I don’t believe in rewards or that God ‘may’ in effect grant some leadership/ruling roles in the next life (I personally don’t find it appealing or altogether consistent with the bibles witness of mans utter failure at leading and ruling but… Secondly; Gods will that we all be one in mind and will. And that it is His Will not ours. Albeit He will rule through us), but rather I see Gods purpose being that we are One, One in Him, God with man, and one humanity. All equal, where sin no longer separates human from human but rather we are all individuals united in God. I see that as the goal of Gods people and Creation, something sin cannot tolerate.

(And, thus my emphasis on God’s weeding out, gardening (thanks Homer), His field. Some people may just not ‘want’ to be in such a loving close intimate relationship with God and other humans, some may just not be wired that way, inclined that way, whether they were formed that way, or hardened that way I don’t know, maybe there really are some vessels made for wrath – it could be that they harden themselves into something that is ruined, I don’t know, but I do know God is not planning on having anyone there who does not want to be, and who was not tested. Eternity is a long time to be where you really don’t want to be…)

And another thing, it is interesting you are quoting a passage surrounded by warnings of final decisions and works - being rather ‘final’? The parable of the wise and foolish Virgins; But he answered, ‘Truly I say to you, I do not know you’. Then in the Parable of the Talents; Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth’. Then of course the Judgment; “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (remember I am a CI not a ET)

And I agree these are eschatological repercussions, but interesting that you have argued before that the Kingdom ‘story’ of the unforgiving servant is ‘not’ eschatological (I think that was the ‘Barclay’ thread); “My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.” (Matt 18)

I still do not see the talents parable explaining why God limits our earthly existence (?).
Nor, I do not see an answer to; Why does God hide Himself?
(When he could easily reveal the truth, and avoid the test, and get on with demonstrating his love, and Presence (?)

[Singalphile]

Hi RICHinCHRIST. Thank you for your response.

RICHinCHRIST wrote:
I agree. But classical Arminianism would say that this earthly life is the testing ground for the determination of whether one will have salvation after death.

I don't know much of anything about Arminianism, but I would tend to agree with a statement like that (though I'd want to clarify a bit).

RICHinCHRIST wrote:
My question is, why wouldn't God give more opportunities to others who may sincerely have a change of heart if He made it more unequivocally clear to them His intentions, like in the case with Paul or Thomas?

I'm not sure how everyone could have the same life experiences. Paul apparently could have ignored his experience (Acts 26:19), and Jesus said to Thomas that those who believe without seeing are particularly blessed (John 20:29). Some people grow up immersed in great Christian families and circumstances but still reject Jesus. Others have the opposite life and come to God for no very remarkable reason. God could now write his gospel in the sky and schedule a face-to-face with every person. Then Jesus could personally command every person to abandon sin and become His follower to attain glory and immortality (Romans 2:7). I dare say some would still reject Him and His offer. In Luke 16:19-38, Jesus has Abraham wrapping up the parable (I guess) with the statement that, "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead."

RICHinCHRIST wrote:
If only in this life we have a chance (and after death there is no second chance), why wouldn't God exercise more influence in swaying the will of His enemies?

"More influence" than what? Every minute of waking life is a chance to humbly acknowledge God, seek God, choose righteousness over evil, etc. Sadly, some people seem intent (profanity warning) on not doing that. God's followers and enemies alike, from childhood, know that death is just around the corner. I'm really not sure why God does not return now and really sway wills. Paul had an answer for his readers in 2 Peter 3:8-9 when he told them that some (of them, perhaps) would perish when the Lord returns, and God didn't want any of them to perish but to come to repentance. It is clearly implied that they would not necessarily have or take that opportunity after Christ's return.

I guess that some who have not heard of Jesus and who have sought God in the little light they have will discover that they they have been saved and will accept that Christ is their Lord (based in part on Matt 25:34-40 and plenty of other verses, I think). I doubt that there will be a sort of blanket "Do you believe in me now?" do-overs for all on judgement day. God will truly know every mans' heart, of course.

RICHinCHRIST wrote:
Wouldn't that be the loving thing to do?

I can't say, because I don't know everyone's heart/will as God does. I know, though, that God has done things and allows things to happen now that don't seem loving to me. (Though I trust Him wholly.) So when God decides to judge and destroy ungoldy men (2 Peter 3:7) or anyone else that He made, then so be it. Like mattrose said, I don't think God is going to make anyone trust/believe in Him against their will, much less everyone. If God is going to eventually have a "face-to-face" with everyone and really get serious about "swaying the will of His enemies", then I can see why one would wonder why He doesn't just do it now. (Suggestions have been made in this thread.)

RICHinCHRIST,
Like over in Breckmin's similar fallacy-of-CU thread, I am here not able to see the inconsistency or logical fallacy that you see. God made and loves everyone and the offer of salvation from sin and death is not out of anyone's reach, I believe. It does not logically follow that God must therefore grant eternal life to everyone that He has made - retesting them in "Summer School" or tormenting them by fire for as long as it takes for them to love Him. Most importantly, the Bible seems to me to clearly teach that He won't.
If you hope or believe that the Bible teaches that God will give some or all people an "equal" opportunity to become a follower of Christ in A) "Hades" right now before Christ's return or B) after Christ's return on judgement day, then I have no serious problem with that. Neither A nor B seem incompatible with any known view of "hell" or anything in Arminianism or Christian teaching that I'm familiar with.