I just read through this entire thread and I have a very simple solution.
If you want to discuss this question with a rational, objective, and reasoned individuals from the Calvinistic perspective who will give you an answer that is more representative of actual Calvinistic scholars then you need to engage with Archangel or zrs6v4. I actually agreed with both of their answers, as would most non-Calvinistic scholars.
If you want to continue to banter with someone who makes unqualified, provocative and controversial statements then I think it is obvious who you can engage. Clearly, since Archangel's and zrs6v4's posts remain mostly ignored, it is more fun to engage the provocateurs. I think this goes to show the state of our media today...we are drawn to the sensational and controversial, rather than the rational and reasonable.
Did God Kill His own Son Upon The Cross?
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by JesusFan, Nov 28, 2011.
Page 5 of 6
-
-
-
Now, zrs6v4 and Archangel,
Does God's active involvement to ensure the crucifixion prove that God takes the same type of active role to ensure all other kinds of evil (such as Dahmer molestation of children etc)?
In other words, couldn't it be that God actively intervened to ensure the crucifixion due to its redemptive purpose and thus it was divinely unique. Must we conclude that God actively intervenes to ensures the molestation of a child in the same manner? As some might argue that God's active role to ensure the crucifixion is proof that God actively ensures all evil.
What do you think? -
The world was created for the Cross. That Adam would have remained uncorrupted, and sin not have entered in was impossible.
-
I think Luke2427 may not like what I have to say, and may well get angry with me, maybe not.
I happen to believe the thread titles itself could be worded differently, but that is Luke2427's choice. The problem with this is it draws ire from others just in the way it is worded. Perhaps the title could be formed into a question, then others could accept it more readily, but I won't make excuses for them either.
The fact is that God did crush His Son. Part of what we see here in the reactions to the title is that persons are shocked with things not explored, in things of God not really spoken about much in churches involving the Sovereignty of God. Unfortunately God is not multi-faceted in churches these days, but is painted as "Love" and "Tolerance" and "Kind" and in some senses almost a pushover. How can one stand "in awe" of God with the present theologies that are possessed by the churches? One simply cannot. The totality of God's being must be expressed or we are teaching a lie to people, and some are going to be very surprised about all there is to God someday.
So, let's rightly divide the Word, and preach God in all His glory, not just the parts that don't offend or only the parts that sound pretty to us. By the way, this fact Luke2427 presents, which is really "Bible" paints God to me so glorious in His knowledge and wisdom, it is absolutely priceless in its beauty. It is the Biblical truth concerning God. Some are afraid to embrace these truths, as they have God all neatly packed into their theological box, and anything that threatens their limited concept has to be incorrect. This my friends is shameful, yet at the same time true.
The thing he is getting at, and the way I would state it is that God is the Author of our Salvation, and is the Author of all of it, including crushing His Son. This includes seeing to it His Son die upon the Cross for our sins, even the most grotesque sins of mankind laid upon Him and being charged to Him, to the extent that He exercised justice upon His Son as guilty for what we had done, and as the text says "It pleased God to crush Him." Perhaps if we understand it in these terms, that He did crush Him for the sake of justice meted out upon Him for our sins, persons could see this and accept the truth, that in fact God did do this very thing.
Gods hand was in it all. We should stand in awe of all of His workings. -
The Archangel Well-Known Member
The Jews that delivered Christ to the Romans and the Romans that Crucified Christ were acting of their own free will. We do not believe they were coerced in any way.
The murders that Dahmer committed, the molestation that was [allegedly] committed at Penn State were all the result of free human agents--without coercion from the Almighty.
Our position states that God doesn't actively cause these things, but He ordains that they be and He ordains that they happen. God super-intends all things (and I do mean all without exception). For the elect, all things work together for good--whether it serves to bring that person to Christ or serves to strengthen a believer's faith. For the non-elect, things are not so certain.
If you look at the account of the life of Joseph in the Old Testament you see God ordaining the free actions of the brothers--selling Joseph into slavery--in order to serve His greater purposes--getting Israel to Egypt so that Exodus could happen, providing food for the family, etc.
On a side note: It is very interesting that the brothers of Joseph, in their plan to kill him (which later changed to selling him) and the execution of that plan, actually brought about the very circumstances they tried to avoid. Had they not acted in their sinful way, the family likely would have starved to death along with the rest of the known world. It was not happenstance that brought Joseph to power, it was God and it was done in His perfect timing through the sinful actions of the brothers and Potiphar's wife.
Remember: "[29] Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. [30] But even the hairs of your head are all numbered. [31] Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows." (Matthew 10:29-31 ESV)
If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without the permission of the Father, then nothing in all the earth happens with out that permission. As I've already stated, though, giving permission for something to happen is not the same as causing something to happen. After all there is a very big difference between me standing aside as a friend jumps off a bridge and me throwing that same friend off a bridge.
The Archangel -
NOTE: NON-BAPTISTS (not active members of a Baptist Church) may NOT post in areas for Baptists only
-
God provided the Lamb, as was typed in the sacrifice of issaic by Abraham, so why is it wrong that God sent Jesus by direct cause to die as the Messiah foreshadowed/foretold in the OT? -
Which is a little different than allow. -
I think you are right. That is the better practice.
-
My apologies brother Luke2427. I saw your name in this thread so much I forgot Jesusfan started this thread!!!! :laugh:
-
The second Adam died the very death assigned to the first Adam so God could destroy death and him that has the power of death (sin), that is Satan.
Satan sin and death were present when it was said, "Let there be light." This has to be true for the Lamb was already considered "slain" and man had not been created yet.
It is through the regenerated man child, the Christ that God did this by his resurrection from the DEAD, his being the firstborn from the dead.
However evil is still in the world, in this present age and to me that is the importance of the gospel of the kingdom of God. That Jesus is going to return and, "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed:" "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. It will be a different world, age. The resurrected will rule with Christ. Evil will be dealt with and in time will vanish. Satan will not be allowed to deceive and will eventually be destroyed.
It isn't about Calvin and some other guy IMHO. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
It was indeed a war between the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God.
Satan has been defeated.
Page 5 of 6