Jumping Ship

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by swaimj, Mar 24, 2003.

  1. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am interested in knowing how you reconcile two statements which seem to conflict.

    First, in Acts 27:22, Paul, on a ship in the middle of a storm, encourages those on the ship by saying "...I urge you to take heart, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship."

    Second, a few days later the sailors suspected that the ship was nearing ground and might run up on the rocks. The sailors were lowering boats to leave the ship and Paul said "Unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved." (verse 31).

    Isn't it a contradiction to say "there will be no loss of life" and then to say "if you leave the ship you will die". How do you reconcile these two statments into a coherent whole?
     
  2. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    no contradiction at all. In the first instance we find Paul specifies they must stay on the ship, in the second he also says they must stay on the ship.

    God Bless.
    Bro. Dallas
     
  3. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    I just read the chapter again to make sure my memory was correct. It seems God's protection was over those on the ship; leaving the ship was therefore doubly hazardous at that point. In verse 26, we see God had given Paul the lives of all who sailed with him. That means those on board. In verse 30 we see some sailors were going to try to escape by means of a deception, and that Paul warned the captain the men could not be saved UNLESS they stayed with the ship.

    I do not see a contradiction here... [​IMG]

    =========

    edit: I was evidently still writing while Bro. Dallas was posting, thus you have two witnesses...! :D
     
  4. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where, in the first instance, does Paul specify that they stay on the ship? To my understanding, he simply states that no one to whom he is speaking will be lost. There is no qualification about staying on the ship. I don't see where you are getting the qualification.
     
  5. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Is there a Calvinist vs Armenian conflict over these scriptures?
     
  6. russell55

    russell55
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe I'm missing something, and you see something I don't, but I really don't see the contradiction.

    Saying there will be no loss of life just means that when all is said and done, no one will have died. It doesn't say anything about how that will be accomplished, nor does it say that there will be no loss of life, no matter what they do.

    If those men had abandoned ship, then they would have died. But they all stayed on board, and they all were brought safely to land, just as Paul had said they would be.
     
  7. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Obviously I have not made my point clear simply by asking the question since no one is getting it.
    Here, to my understanding is the difficulty which must be resolved:

    In verse 22, you have a declaration by Paul of direct revelation from God delivered by an angel that unequivocally and without qualification reveals the future, saying "there will be no loss of life among you".

    In verse 31, you have a statement by Paul in which there is a distinct possibility that some of the men will die. "Unless (that's a qualification) these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved".

    So, on the one hand, God says no one will die; on the other hand, Paul says some of them will die if they choose to go against Paul's instruction.

    This is a classic example of the tension between God's sovereignty and man's free will. I brought it up because I have never seen it addressed on this board. (I also brought it up because I think it goes against the way calvinists reconcile the two and I just LOVE [​IMG] an opportunity to point out that they are wrong). :D
     
  8. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    You are attempting to divide a single story into several stories.

    The fact is that the vessel in which Paul was a passenger provides the safety sufficient for all, and that departing from that vessel is no guarantee of safety. That is all that Paul is saying in Vs 31.
     
  9. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Paul first states the ship only will be lost. The natural man then sees the physical loss and equates that to the present danger to his person. They then attempt to leave the ship, at which time Paul tells them in order to live they must continue in the ship; though the ship will be lost, none who remain therein will suffer.

    [I stop here for your answer, which I believe I already have considered, but I want to give you the opportunity to raise it].

    Still no contradiction.

    Bro. Dallas
     
  10. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since you are addressing the concern I raised, I see that you understand the conflict. However, your answers are insufficient and avoid the clear wording of the text. Paul is not speaking only of the ship. In 23 he says "there will be no loss of life. In 31 he clearly threatens them with loss of life if they jump overboard. In the calvinistic system, the soverereign promise of God in 23 makes the threat of 31 invalid.
     
  11. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not at all. God being sovereign, He uses means. That is why we must preach the gospel. It is the means that God has chosen to spread the gospel. The men staying on the ship was the means God chose to save everyone on the ship.

    You are chasing a rabbit and the rabbit just outran you. [​IMG]
     
  12. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    At the very least, those who stayed on the ship represent the elect who have heard the message. Any leaving the ship then become those that do not perservere.

    This portion of scripture follows the Doctrine of Sovereign Grace and I had never noticed it before, thanks for pointing it out brother.

    God Bless.
    Bro. Dallas
     
  13. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    25
    And would the arminian system then say that the threat of 31 (based on the will of man?) makes the sovereign promise of God in 23 invalid? :confused: I don't see any problem with any of these statements.
     
  14. swaimj

    swaimj
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken H and Frogman. Great response. Next time I find a problem I can't deal with I will follow your example and turn it into an allegory. With allegory as my hermenuetic and a little imagination, I can solve any problem. :rolleyes:

    BTW, could the men have jumped out of the boat and into the water if they had wanted to?
     
  15. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    None left the vessel and in fact the escape boat was cut away. Truly none perished.
     
  16. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Yes, they could have jumped out of their own will, but the record says that none were lost!
     
  17. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, they could have jumped out of their own will, but the record says that none were lost! </font>[/QUOTE]I believe the scripture shows that they would have jumped out of their own will, except the purpose of God was revealed to them through the instrumentality of Paul and they remained in the immediate environment through the Grace of God.

    Bro. Dallas
     
  18. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    No disagreement, the record shows that none were lost!
     
  19. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know, maybe Paul just knew the Roman soldiers perhaps could not swim. :D :confused:

    Brother Dallas
     
  20. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I mentioned nothing about an allegory. The story in Acts is a true story and God used the means of having everyone stay on the ship to save everyone on the ship.
     

Share This Page

Loading...