miscellaneous topics on religion

I've read a fair bit on it and I'm reticent to start because I have a lot of books on the go. But I'll start with your thoughts on this observation of my own:

1) For "predestination people," the fundamental characteristic of God is sovereignty and his primary aim is the realization or manifestation of his glory.
2) For "free will people," the fundamental characteristic of God is love and his primary aim is the realization or manifestation of his love.

What do you think?

So you're saying that the people who keep saying that are full of shit.

My daily e-mail that will, if read every day, result in my reading the NT in its entirety, was from Matthew 22. I know it's taken out of the context in which it appears, but I am not sure that matters a whole lot theologically speaking. It's Matthew 22:14:

“For many are invited, but few are chosen.”

That such a verse would lead some to believe God is arbitrary and capricious is due to our inability to fathom the Divine mind, of which it says in Isaiah "my thoughts are not like your thoughts and my ways are not like your ways." That's probably a paraphrase of some sort but I think it's accurate.

And in John 3 where Jesus says "except ye be born again, ye cannot see the things of God." or some such. Maybe it says kingdom. But the point is the same - you gotta be born again to see it, and you can't choose it until you see it because until you see it you don't know it can be chosen.  (Which also means that being born again and being saved are two different events, the latter following the former as assuredly as day following the night but not necessarily that close together.  But that's a good subject for later discussion, and I by no means claim to be an expert on any of this but I have done some reading and thinking.)

So is everybody "born again?" And if not, why not is the 64,000 dollar question. And if not, is it the God's fault they aren't? The scripture tells us no, it's not God's fault. How can that be reconciled? It can't. Even Charles Spurgeon couldn't figure it out. But he believed it and preached it to multitudes.

It's not of him that willeth but God who hath mercy on whom He pleases.

I heard a guy say one time "preach like it's all up to you, because God says that's what you're supposed to do (says so in the Book), but pray like it's all up to God, because it is (says so in the Book)."

But if it's all up to God and He's gonna do what He's gonna do, why pray at all? Because He says to, that's why, and it's more for our benefit than His anyway. Prayers are among those good works He prepared in advance for us to do that it talks about in Ephesians and they produce a sweet, savory smell to the Divine nostrils. Plus the fact that He lets us participate in things He's doing is an earthly and heavenly reward in and of itself.

I recently did a paper for school on total depravity (which has multiple definitions, by the way, depending on your tradition). One idea that emerged is that our very spirits are gifts from God—almost like "borrowed from him." So the Calvinist idea of "completely dead" would contradict that. I'm not sold on the idea, but I think there might be something to that...that there is something within us that is always "reaching for God" because it actually belongs to God. We should also remember that "dead in our sins" is a metaphor used only once (I believe) in the New Testament, and some of the reformers built an entire doctrine on that one verse. That's problematic.

I think it's more dangerous to insist that things not make sense.

But see, that's the problem: distinguishing the words "total" and "utter." Luther and then Calvin shifted the definition of "total depravity" from "completely incapable" to "completely evil."



That's a non sequitur. I understand the implications but why should "who gets the credit" be an issue? It's just a strange way of framing the problem.



I think the problem has been framed wrong because the Biblical text has been squeezed through an individualist lens. The individual interpretations that support some of the theological frameworks are not always about what people say they're about. The interpretations are derivative (which isn't wrong)—but then the derivative interpretations become the foundations for an entire theological structure. That's problematic.

Well, that's one verse in the whole Bible. Not a whole lot to go on to determine God's priority and agenda.



Well, that's what I discovered researching my paper. I could dig up the direct (translated) quotes if you want...



No, it's pretty dense and general. I'll be more specific:

Romans 8-9 is about Israel. Not about "you and me as individuals." You can extrapolate what it says about Israel to apply it to individuals, which is fine, I guess. But to take that extrapolation about individuals (as, say predestined, Pharaoh, clay in the hands of the potter), and make it a foundational doctrine (specifically, that each one of us individuals is predestined (or not) for salvation)—to make that a starting point for a systematic theology...yeah, I think that's problematic.

Romans 8-9 is about Israel, not "you and me." This is why part of the larger context of these passages includes Romans 11 (being grafted in with the potential to be pruned away).

how many times does God have to say something for it to be considered scriptural truth?

I think it's taking about Israel...predestined, etc., but the "true Israel," fulfilling all God's intentions for the nation, is Jesus...and being "in Christ" includes us in that predestination, etc.

I am enjoying this but need to hit the rack. Big day tomorrow. I know you know who Charles Spurgeon is, but other inquiring minds may have no idea. I don't worship or idolize the man, but I have read about him a lot and about his theological bent. He was a Particular Baptist. You know what that is, too. Others may not but it's not necessary that they do. Here's an excerpt from the excellent wikipedia article on him:

Walter Thornbury later wrote in "Old and New London" (1897) describing a subsequent meeting at Surrey:

a congregation consisting of 10,000 souls, streaming into the hall, mounting the galleries, humming, buzzing, and swarming – a mighty hive of bees – eager to secure at first the best places, and, at last, any place at all. After waiting more than half an hour – for if you wish to have a seat you must be there at least that space of time in advance… Mr. Spurgeon ascended his tribune. To the hum, and rush, and trampling of men, succeeded a low, concentrated thrill and murmur of devotion, which seemed to run at once, like an electric current, through the breast of everyone present, and by this magnetic chain the preacher held us fast bound for about two hours. It is not my purpose to give a summary of his discourse. It is enough to say of his voice, that its power and volume are sufficient to reach every one in that vast assembly; of his language that it is neither high-flown nor homely; of his style, that it is at times familiar, at times declamatory, but always happy, and often eloquent; of his doctrine, that neither the 'Calvinist' nor the 'Baptist' appears in the forefront of the battle which is waged by Mr. Spurgeon with relentless animosity, and with Gospel weapons, against irreligion, cant, hypocrisy, pride, and those secret bosom-sins which so easily beset a man in daily life; and to sum up all in a word, it is enough to say, of the man himself, that he impresses you with a perfect conviction of his sincerity.

Spurgeon's work went on. A Pastors' College was founded in 1856 by Spurgeon and was renamed Spurgeon's College in 1923, when it moved to its present building in South Norwood Hill, London.[10] At the Fast Day, 7 October 1857, he preached to the largest crowd ever – 23,654 people – at The Crystal Palace in London. Spurgeon noted:

In 1857, a day or two before preaching at the Crystal Palace, I went to decide where the platform should be fixed; and, in order to test the acoustic properties of the building, cried in a loud voice, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." In one of the galleries, a workman, who knew nothing of what was being done, heard the words, and they came like a message from heaven to his soul. He was smitten with conviction on account of sin, put down his tools, went home, and there, after a season of spiritual struggling, found peace and life by beholding the Lamb of God. Years after, he told this story to one who visited him on his death-bed.

and a link to the article itself: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Spurgeon