The Evangelical Universalist Forum

More To It Than Love

Theology Philosophical
#1

We can see this in a modified argument from Cilfford Williams:

  1. Some need cosmic security. They need to know that they will live beyond the grave in a state that is free from the defects of this life, a state that is full of goodness and justice. They need a more expansive life, one in which they love and are loved. They need meaning, and need to know that they are forgiven for going astray. They also need to experience awe and wonder, to delight in goodness and to be present with those they love.

  2. The best explanation for the presence of these needs in some humans is that there is a God who has put them there.

  3. Faith in God satisfies these needs.

  4. Therefore, they are justified in believing there is a God in whom they can have faith

For me, when I’m in the presence of what I consider to be “beautiful” some of those needs often come up. “Beauty” often stirs within me a longing for the transcendent. It’s like something just tells me that there has to be more to it than just this temporary existence. It’s like I possess an instinct for transcendence, stimulated by beauty. For me, beauty evokes an ideal that is more real than anything I’ve encountered in this transitory world. It stirs up a sense of longing in my soul.

Why doesn’t God put these needs in everyone? I don’t know all of God’s reasons for doing what He does. I know He’s not obligated to give rebel sinners grace. They willfully reject God. They don’t want to have anything to do with Him. So, God’s not obligated to give such people grace. It would go against the whole concept and meaning of grace if God were obligated to give it. If He gives it to some and not others then He does nothing wrong. He reserves the right to have mercy on whomever He pleases. This is the Divine prerogative.

Free-will is a myth
#2

Why do you assume that He has not?

Who are we to declare when we judge God to be right (or wrong)? Who made you a judge over God to declare that He has done nothing wrong in your eyes?
I prefer to let Him speak for Himself and what He says is that He is Love.

Again, He has declared whom He loves and that is the whole world.

It is my prerogative to accept what He has said about Himself and to trust Him in that.

#3

Pilgrim,

It’s clear that He hasn’t put these needs in everyone. Not everyone is saved in this life. This doesn’t mean all won’t eventually be saved though.

#4

We can also see how for some the problem of evil and suffering carries a lot of weight. For those who haven’t had such experiences and haven’t the needs described above don’t believe in God. But for those of us who have and are justified in believing in a loving God the problem of evil and suffering will carry little weight. We will know that God must have justifiable reasons for permitting evil and suffering even if we can’t say what they are. The secret things belong to the Lord. This should be expected because of God’s infinite wisdom and understanding as compared to our finite and limited grasp on reality.

#5

Michael, you are making assumptions which you have not qualified:

How do you know that every single person has not got exactly the same Image of God flowing through their veins, and that this image is not all they need to have a level playing field. If people are incapable of choosing life, then God would be unjust in expecting them to act in a way that they are incapable of.

#6

We have God’s image but not the needs I described above. How do I know? Because I’ve talked to atheist and they’ve told me. The argument is person relative. As all arguments are. People have a choice. They just refuse. They don’t want God as I already explained in the OP.

#7

Where is your “biblical evidence” which you so often demand from others?

#8

And yet God will save them all regardless of their choices. Doesn’t that make free will irrelevant? I don’t understand how you can make that statement when it flies in the face of UR theology. If it is God who draws and inspires and it is HIS will that is done then choice has little or nothing to do with it.

#9

Due to the corruption of man’s nature his heart is in bondage. Indeed, he is a slave to sin. On the contrary we see God with whom it is impossible to sin. He still makes choices but because of His holy nature He cannot sin. He has no desire for sin and therefore cannot sin. Free agency is a mark of humanity as such. All humans are free agents in the sense that they make their own decisions about what they will do, choosing as they please according to their desires and thoughts. When humans make it to heaven they will have a completely new nature with all sin and sinful desires removed from their hearts. They will be free from sin. Because they have new natures they will be like God and it will be impossible for them to sin. They still choose what they want but because all sin is removed from their hearts they always want to do the right thing. The Bible describes the fallen nature of man in many places.

Paul states that in our fallen condition we do not seek after God. No one seeks after God. When the Bible speaks of inabilities It’s speaking of the inability to do what is truly good. There is common grace that enables people to do some good. But without this grace man cannot do good:

Those who are accustomed to doing evil can no more choose to do good than a leopard choose to change his spots. The leopards spots are part of his nature. Likewise sinners all have a corrupted nature. This is why (apart from saving grace) no one seeks after God. Those who are according to the sinful flesh cannot subject themselves to God and His law:

The mind set on the flesh is an enemy and does not subject itself to the law of God (willful and wanton rebellion). It is not able to do so.

How can anyone be saved? Because there is a sinner seeker. A Savior, who saves people perfectly without fail. This is the difference between man’s religions and Christianity. One is focused on man’s abilities. The other is focused on God’s abilities to accomplish what He sets out to do

Everyone is unable to come without the drawing of the Father. But God will accomplish what He sets out to do. Indeed, later it says God will draw all people to Himself. Without fail.

#10

Cole,

You and I are not far apart on this. The way I see it is that God chooses a channel through which/whom to bless the world.

He chose Abraham, and the thing He promised Abraham (well, one of the things) was that through Abe’s descendents, He would bless the rest of the world. The Jews were a called out, chosen people. God offered them the chance to be His conduit of blessing to humanity, but instead they became insular and not only refused to do good to the world around, even refused to do good to one another. Father knew they would do this (imo), but they are an example for us demonstrating that we cannot do good on our own. Israel tried to keep the law. Their intentions were good, but as you say, they were enslaved to sin (as we all are until we are freed by God and given new hearts). They are a demonstration of the way things DON’T work. IMO they had a chance to each and every one of them be priests and kings before God (as we are allowed to do) in the encounter of the nation with God at the burning Mt Sinai, but they said, “Don’t let God speak to us any more lest we die; instead let Him tell you (Moses) what to do and you tell us and we’ll do it.” So God said, “What they’ve said is good. Here let me give them the law they want.” (Obviously, I’ve paraphrased this rather than looking it up, but I’m sure you’re familiar with the story.)

As we know, following the law in their own strength didn’t work out well for Israel and it doesn’t work out too well for us either. But that’s beside the point. God chose one nation from all the nations. Then He sent His Son, who became a son of Abraham – one Man from the nation – the last Adam, the second Adam, the one new man.

Now the net begins to get bigger. Father chooses one body of believers from not only the nation of Israel, but from among all the nations. These are the ones who believe in this life. This is the church, born on Pentecost. This is the elect you’ve been talking about. These people are NOT chosen because they’re better than anyone else or because they merit being chosen. They are the firstfruits from among the nations and they are chosen (as Israel was chosen) to bless all those who have not yet come into the body of Christ. Different people will argue about whether these people’s personal choices enter into this. I think they do, but I’d have a hard time explaining to you why I think that. I wouldn’t be dogmatic about it. The important thing to remember though, is that the body of Christ is chosen FOR not INSTEAD OF the rest of the world.

We are chosen to have the honor of participating in the ministry of reconciliation. Not for special privilege, but rather for special responsibility. We are God’s agents of blessing and reconciliation in this world.

So there you go. That’s why I agree with you on this, Cole, and that’s the way in which I agree with you.

Blessings, Cindy

#11

Michael, this is Calvin’s *irresistible grace and total depravity * “double-predestination” doctrine. New wine into old wine skins… Somethings gotta give.

#12

On top of that you say that there is free agency and then man cannot choose to do good. You can’t have it both ways. I’m with Stef on the wineskins on this. You need to decide which side you are on. If it is truth, then it has to be the same truth at all times. Not where your own inspiration dictates. Too much mixing of doctrines for my taste.

#13

You two need to read more books on universalism. The very first book on universalism I read has a section about this called “free will”. The book is called “Hope Beyond Hell” by Gerry Beauchemin. Says Gerry:

#14

I think you need to read the book again. You are confusing ‘free will’ with double predestination.

#15

I’ve read it many times. I just got done reading it. Nowhere have I talked about double predestination. Go back and re-read what I wrote.

Everyone is predestined to be with God.

Here’s another book that is for universalism called, “Hell And Eternity: It’s All Greek To Me”. Says the author:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51mwaatzbAL.SL500_AA300_PIaudible,BottomRight,13,73_AA300.jpg

#16

Free will is a myth. Yet you said we had it, then you quote a book that says it’s not real. Do these contradictions even appear in your head as you are typing them? And I said we were predestined to be saved…ALL of us. So what exactly do I need to read it for? If you re-read all of your posts in this thread alone you should see all the times you contradicted yourself. I’m fine with UR. You however seem to be struggling with the broader concepts.

#17

This is an excellent point Cindy!

#18

Hi Watchman, I enjoy your posts.

Do you really think the free will is a myth? Could you explain what you mean by this?

I don’t think Michael recognizes as yet that his comments are inherent with contradictions. I think people are responding to his contradictions more than anything else.

Steve

#19

I don’t find anything that Michael wrote above to be disagreeable. It all sounds solid to me.

The church was chosen in Jesus Christ from before the foundation of the world (Ephesian 1:4). No man can come to Christ except the Father draw him (John 6:44). All that have been given to Christ by the Father come to him (John 6:37). The Pharisees would not come to Christ, because they were not his sheep (John 10:26). In the fullness of time, all will be reconciled to Christ (Ephesians 1:10), but only the elect Church in this age.

#20

Hi 1824,

For me, at least, I tried to understand Michael’s statement: “Why doesn’t God put these needs in everyone?” Michael was explaining that the process that leads to faith, a need for “cosmic security”, is “put” into some and not into others. The ones is has been “put” into are saved, the others are not. By implication this is a claim for double predestination, even though Michael denies saying this or believing this. This is an example of an inherent contradiction. Pilgrim asked for clarification on this very thing. Pilgrim asked: “Why do you assume that He has not?” (not put this need into everyone). To which Michael replied: “It’s clear that He hasn’t put these needs in everyone. Not everyone is saved in this life.” In other words, God has “put” a desire into some and not others, therefore predestining them to punishment because God did not put into them a desire for faith. This is a form of double predestination. If you have anything to add to support Michael’s claim I would like to hear it.

Steve