In the final paragraph of his post Roy writes:
To me it is not a question of sovereignty as much as it is a question of God's love. If God truly loved humanity why would he want to grant by his own sovereign choice that Adam would Fall and that this would plummet mankind into a horrible existence marked by death, destruction, and decay?
This is a fair question that does need to be addressed by myself and others who hold my position that God predestined the fall of man. The question in my own words is, "how can a John 3:16 God predestine such a catastrophic event that would hurt so many people?" Let's look at how the Bible defines the love of God.
As I have written in the past, I do not believe that Calvinists can simply replace the word "world" that appears in John 3:16 with the word "elect." It seems to me that a natural reading of the text indicates a love of God for the world. However, I am troubled at the emphasis that the word "world" gets from so many people when discussing such a Christ centered verse. In light of the context it seems best to understand John 3:16 as a wonderful description of God's willingness to save people from such an evil world. Because the verses that follow 3:16 explicitly disallow for a universal understanding of salvation we must realize the difference between God's love for the world in a general sense and His love for those whom He has chosen to save.
It was important for me to go through all of that to make the distinction between God's love for the world and His love for the elect because I think we can clearly see how God's love fits perfectly with predestining the fall of man.
Here are 5 verses that show the greatness of God's love and the necessity of the fall for that love to be demonstrated:
Red= God's loving purpose.
Bold= Necessary consequence of the fall of man.
"Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you." (John 15:13-14)
"Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline..." (Revelation 3:19)
"In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:10)
"I have loved you,' says the LORD. But you say, 'How have you loved us?' 'Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?' declares the LORD. 'Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated." (Malachi 1:2-3)
"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish." (Ephesians 5:25-27)
"For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:6-8)
Just to recap. God's love is shown in:
Death.
Reproof and discipline (which doesn't happen without sin).
Loving people who don't love Him.
In contrast to those whom He does not love.
Removing wrath that was meant for sinners (that's what propitiation does).
The Church (the church is a called out assembly of believers in Christ).
Sanctification and cleansing (which doesn't happen to perfect people).
Our Weakness.
Our Ungodliness.
Our Sinfulness.
When we allow God to speak for Himself through the Scriptures it is clear how His love is best demonstrated. I am willing to accept the Arminian claim that they do not hold to their views because of free-will but, rather, because of their understanding of the love of God. However, I disagree that the Arminian understanding of God's love is the correct understanding. The Bible displays God's saving love as amazing for 3 reasons: (1) it is a love for such vile sinners, (2) it is a particular love for those whom He chose to love, and (3) it is a love with an infinite cost, namely, the death of the Son of God.
I think it is good for people to engage in civil debate from time to time. Roy and I would disagree on this subject whether I wrote a response to his post or not so I didn't think it would hurt to voice my disagreement. If you have questions or comments (whether positive or negative) I would love it if you would post them in the comment section.
Grace and Peace,
Stephen
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment