70 AD- calling you Davo

[davo]

Thank Dave for your honest and encouraging appraisal… much appreciated. Pantelism makes no claim to have a mortgage on “truth” and in fact in one sense (and this might sound a little weird) sees truth as a little over-rated. What I mean by that is this… in my walk with God I have held many so-called “truths” dear to my heart and passionately so, even thanking God for their revelation ONLY to in time have jettisoned them for some greater truth etc. I came to the realisation one day that in spite of or despite my many movements in “belief” God has never loved me any more or less than ever He did, regardless of whatever present truth I was clinging to.

Sure, beliefs do affect behaviour, but none of that changes God’s grace… it might frustrate the outworking of its blessing in my life, but it’s there nonetheless. Some will say you HAVE TO believe… pantelism says it’s GOOD TO believe. I used to tell people they need to believe in God — these days if it comes up I simply tell them God believes in them. I take a more contemplative way these days and tend to follow this maxim (when I’m not belting someone around the head on a forum, lol )…

Rom 14:22a Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Cf. Mic 6:8

[maintenanceman]

Davo said:

I used to tell people they need to believe in God — these days if it comes up I simply tell them God believes in them.

Thanks Dave and Dave.

We’ll go from here. You guys are kinda cool.

[Origen]

I take a more contemplative way these days and tend to follow this maxim (when I’m not belting someone around the head on a forum, lol )…

Referring to your recent conversations, e.g. with 81 year old Paidon, are ye?

As it’s said, what comes around goes around.

[davo]

I take a more contemplative way these days and tend to follow this maxim (when I’m not belting someone around the head on a forum, lol )…

Referring to your recent conversations, e.g. with 81 year old Paidon, are ye?

As it’s said, what comes around goes around.

You’re a joke. Sure, Paidon and I have locked horns over various issues and yet despite seeing some things from slightly differing angles I like the fact that Paidion can THINK, and thinks for himself… could you learn from his example… hmmm?

[Origen]

I take a more contemplative way these days and tend to follow this maxim (when I’m not belting someone around the head on a forum, lol )…

Referring to your recent conversations, e.g. with 81 year old Paidon, are ye?

As it’s said, what comes around goes around.

You’re a joke. Sure, Paidon and I have locked horns over various issues and yet despite seeing some things from slightly differing angles I like the fact that Paidion can THINK, and thinks for himself… could you learn from his example… hmmm?

So much for taking “a more contemplative way these days”, eh. It didn’t take much to bring you back to your true self ;

[davo]

Guilty as charged… I do have to try harder at suffering fools.

[Origen]

Guilty as charged… I do have to try harder at suffering fools.

Getting back on topic, exactly how does one “try harder” in the Pantelistic world?

Does Scripture have anything to do with it?

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

I’m actually a bit more “neutral” here than Dave, regarding Pantelism and Full Pantelism.

If I can spend years in academia, listing to positions on theology, literature, psychology, and philosophy.
Hang around with folks folk the East and various Native American tribes - and partake in their ceremonies.
And be a lifelong member, of the Theosophical Society and listen to their lecturers - talk on bizarre things.

Then I can follow with interest, the views on Pantelism and Full Preterism - while still keeping my own viewpoint.

Which is just like Mary Baker Eddy, thought that her book - was a KEY to the scriptures. I take the Anglican saying of “Reason, Scripture, and Tradition”. But side with Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism, that Sacred Tradition is a key - to understanding Holy Scripture. Just as the Wisdom Tradition, passed down over the centuries - keeps new age garbage, from getting in.

I still have my quirks, mind you. Like the tribulation and the Zombie Apocalypse .

“When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it.”-- Henry Ford

[anon12438761]

Oh man, in addition to everything else, you’re also more neutral than me? Geez, I can’t win.

[Origen]

IF Christ had not died and redeemed Israel then humanity would have remained in its unreconciled state and thus lost forever; which was the scenario prior to Christ rectifying this. HOWEVER…

2Cor 5:19 …that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

The pantelist position understands that God unilaterally reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, where He God unilaterally forgave humanity’s sins… this is the most obvious and plain reading of 2Cor 5:19, i.e., it’s there in black and white. IOW… divine reconciliation is NOT predicated on human response.

‘Human response’ comes from the resultant “realisation” or “revelation” where one gets an inkling of the grace of God that established such wondrous reconciliation and then accordingly expresses one’s heart-felt gratitude to God for this.

Belief does NOT establish truth — truth however can establish belief! << read this again!Again, a pantelist understanding views “the reconciliation” as the established work of God, period. However… coming into the revelation OF reconciliation expressed by a faith response brings one into the realm of “eternal life” in accord with Jesus’ specific definition where eternal life is a coming into the knowledge of God and Christ, as per Jn 17:3. You will note such ‘eternal life’ has EVERYTHING to do with THIS LIFE here and now. This is the life Jesus saves us to. What lies beyond is not an issue.

Paul gives a good distinction between God’s established reconciliation AND THEN the salvation (eternal life) faith releases one into…

Rom 5:10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Christ’s death (crucifixion) wrought reconciliation for all, period; Christ’s life (resurrection) wrought salvation, i.e., eternal life to those grasping it. Salvation is about purpose NOT position — it is about service to God in this life, NOT who gets into heaven in the next.

Now you don’t have to accept any of this, it is however seeing as you asked, the pantelist’ rationale.

Another thought is that reconciliation in 2 Cor.5:19-20 is considered by Paul as an “ongoing process” (p.256 of TDNT, Vol.1). The “phrase ήν καταλλασσων in 2 C. 5:19 does not denote a concluded work: “He was present to reconcile the world to Himself”; when and where this work will be concluded is not brought under consideration in 2 C. 5:19-20. For this reason we should not draw from the fact that Paul thinks of the world as the object of reconciliation the deduction that reconciliation for him consists exclusively in the removal of the relationship of guilt between man and God, since the world as a whole is not a new creation etc. This would amount to saying that what Paul explicitly calls the ministry of reconciliation and the self-reconciliation of man forms no part of reconciliation. Paul does not say that the world is reconciled (καταλλαγεις). The reconciliation of the world is as little finished as the απoβoγή of the Jews. Both have begun in the cross of Christ, and both are in the course of fulfillment (–> 258). We can call the world reconciled in the Pauline sense only as we anticipate the execution of that which is present in the purpose of God and in the foundation” (p.257, Friedrich Buchsel, ed. Gerhard Kittel).

[davo]

The best and most accurate quote your post above contains (since as per usual you have nothing sensible yourself to add) are MY words…

[Origen]

The pantelist position understands that God unilaterally reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, where He God unilaterally forgave humanity’s sins… this is the most obvious and plain reading of 2Cor 5:19, i.e., it’s there in black and white. IOW… divine reconciliation is NOT predicated on human response.

And now for the Scriptural position, which opposes the Extreme Hyper Grace UU Pantelist position:

Acts 3:19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord,

Col.1:13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

1 Jn.1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

Eph.1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace,

Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

1 Jn.1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

[davo]

The pantelist position understands that God unilaterally reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, where He God unilaterally forgave humanity’s sins… this is the most obvious and plain reading of 2Cor 5:19, i.e., it’s there in black and white. IOW… divine reconciliation is NOT predicated on human response.

And now for the Scriptural position,…

2Cor 5:18-19 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

Pantelism agrees with St. Paul… wonderful

https://media.tenor.co/images/d468d418543a862e2f3aabd574359714/tenor.gif(image larger than 3072KB)

[Origen]

Pantelism agrees with St. Paul… wonderful

Which imagination in your mind leads us back to my quote above by the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament & all the Scripture passages i posted that refute your Extreme Hyper Grace UltraU Pantelistic position on forgiveness of all mankind as a past accomplishment based on nothing they do even before they were conceived or born. But i’m sure all the drug pushers out there selling heroin to children will be happy to hear your gospel of Pantelism that they are forgiven while they continue to ply their trade & how you lean to the view that at the moment of death they’ll instantly enter the blessedness of God’s heavenly kingdom forever.

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

Pantelism agrees with St. Paul… wonderful

Which imagination in your mind leads us back to my quote above by the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament & all the Scripture passages i posted that refute your Extreme Hyper Grace UltraU Pantelistic position on forgiveness of the all mankind as a past accomplishment based on nothing they do even before they were conceived or born.

The problem with Sola Scriptural…if you throw out, the collective Orthodox - statistical norm viewpoints…You can make it fit any viewpoint. Whether Davo’s Pantelism…Theosophicist’s Anni Besant’s Esoteric Christianity…Mary Baker Eddy’s, idealistic Christian Science viewpoint…etc.

[Origen]

The problem with Sola Scriptural…if you throw out, the collective Orthodox - statistical norm viewpoints…You can make it fit any viewpoint. Whether Davo’s Pantelism…Theosophicist’s Anni Besant’s Esoteric Christianity…Mary Baker Eddy’s, idealistic Christian Science viewpoint…etc.

You can make a square 4 X 4 inch puzzle piece fit into a 1 inch circumference circular puzzle hole. But can you do it honestly, objectively and by the rules?

[Holy-Fool-P-Zombie]

The problem with Sola Scriptural…if you throw out, the collective Orthodox - statistical norm viewpoints…You can make it fit any viewpoint. Whether Davo’s Pantelism…Theosophicist’s Anni Besant’s Esoteric Christianity…Mary Baker Eddy’s, idealistic Christian Science viewpoint…etc.

You can make a square 4 X 4 inch puzzle piece fit into a 1 inch circumference circular puzzle hole. But can you do it honestly, objectively and by the rules?

I would ask the question: What are the rules and who decides and agrees with them? If we don’t agree with:

The church fathers perspectives
The Reformers perspectives
The Historical Creed’s perspectives

Then anything goes. And you can argue your case and bring in '“evidence” - to back it up. So, just what are these “rules” - you are talking about?

For everyone’s benefit, here’s the Wiki article on Sola Scriptura at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura

Let me quote a section - for reflection

It should be noted, I give jurisprudence, to the Eastern Orthodox, Anglican and Methodist positions.

By contrast, the Anglican Communion and the Methodist Church, though generally considered a form of Protestantism, uphold the doctrine of prima scriptura,[2][3] with Sacred Scripture being illumined by tradition, reason, and in Methodism, experience as well, thus completing the four sides of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.[4][5] The Eastern Orthodox Church holds that to “accept the books of the canon is also to accept the ongoing Spirit-led authority of the church’s tradition, which recognizes, interprets, worships, and corrects itself by the witness of Holy Scripture”.[6] The Catholic Church regards the Apostolic preaching and writing (referred to as Tradition and Scripture respectively) as equal since both came from the Apostles. The Catholic Church describes this as “one common source … with two distinct modes of transmission”,[7] while some Protestant authors call it “a dual source of revelation”.[8]

[Paidion]

[size=130]And now for the Scriptural Position (in context):[/size]

17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.
18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation.
20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
1 Working together with him, then, we appeal to you not to receive the grace of God in vain.(2 Cor 5: 1-8:1 ESV)

Verse 17 indicates that the ones who will “not have their trespasses counted against them” are the regenerated ones—a new creation—totally different from the way they were prior to their regeneration.
Paul states that the work of Christ (on our behalf) was for the purpose of “becoming the righteousness of God.” This is not merely a positional righteousness but is ACTUAL righteousness.

Verse 1 of chapter 8 tells us that when we “work together with Him” we will not be receiving the grace of God in vain. In other words, we will not blindly think God has accepted us by His grace, while allowing us to continue in sin. Rather we will be able to live righteous lives and overcome wrongdoing. We CANNOT live consistently righteous lives through self-effort alone, and God WILL NOT provide His enabling grace unilaterally. But when we coöperate with God’s enabling grace, we CAN become the righteousness of God.

No, there is NOTHING in the Scriptures which indicates that God will accept ANY unrepentant person in his unrepentant state—especially not forever. God will never give up on anyone until righteousness is his state of existence. God wants the best for every person who has ever lived, and He will never relinquish that goal until that is effected.

[davo]

What does it say about a person’s perspective when ‘the Good News for all people’ upsets them?… just asking for a friend.

[Origen]

I would ask the question: What are the rules and who decides and agrees with them?

Consider the cultish heretical insane position that Scripture teaches that Love Omnipotent is a Zombie.

Do you consider that an objective, honest by the rules interpretation of the Scriptures?

If not, why not? What rules of interpretation, objectivity & honesty lead you to your conclusion?

To use another example, does Scripture teach that all sins - past, present & future - of all humans, devils & demons - are already forgiven?

That is what i call an Extreme Hyper Grace viewpoint. As i said to davo:

Which imagination in your mind leads us back to my quote above by the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament & all the Scripture passages i posted that refute your Extreme Hyper Grace UltraU Pantelistic position on forgiveness of all mankind as a past accomplishment based on nothing they do even before they were conceived or born. But i’m sure all the drug pushers out there selling heroin to children will be happy to hear your gospel of Pantelism that they are forgiven while they continue to ply their trade & how you lean to the view that at the moment of death they’ll instantly enter the blessedness of God’s heavenly kingdom forever.