I have not seen this United Church of Christ video in Canada, but noticed it on You Tube months ago. The clip claims that God does not reject people, and yet from a Biblical perspective in John 1:12-13 those who receive God, become children of God, but not by the will of the flesh, or of man, but of God. Leon Morris writes that people by their own efforts cannot enter into the heavenly family. Morris (1989: 128-129). It is God who takes the initiative to save sinners. Morris (1989: 129). Francis Foulkes explains that in Ephesians 1:4, God does predestine individuals to believe in Christ, but this does not oppose human free will. Foulkes (1989: 55). Foulkes presents the idea that God offers salvation to all, and those that accept are elected. Foulkes (1989: 55). I disagree. Cranfield explains that human beings in their fallen state do not fear God, and persons live as practical if not theoretical atheists. Cranfield (1992: 67). Mounce in his Romans commentary points out that although many people seek a type of religious experience, that according to Romans 3, no person seeks God, who must take the initiative in the human salvation process. Mounce (1995: 108-109). I conclude that for those that God does not take this initiative, they will remain rejected by God, as they reject God in sinful choices resulting from a corrupt, fallen nature. God does not force or coerce persons to believe in him or reject him, but must regenerate persons in order for belief in Christ and God to occur. In the process of regeneration, I reason that God enables persons to, with a limited free will, believe in the Biblical God.
Within the context of the people attending a Biblical Christian Church, members and those in leadership should not judge whether or not God will save those who attend who do not live a life according to Biblical standards, and do not claim to believe in Christ. The Christian Church should be a safe place for non-Christians to attend and to hear the gospel message and receive love and respect. Church membership should be left for those that are seemingly willing to live a life based on Biblical standards and will follow the particular essential doctrines of each individual denomination, or church, if it is non-denominational. I view essential doctrines as ones concerning the nature of God as triune, the exclusivity of Christ for salvation, a trust in the Bible as an accurate copy of the original inspired letters, and a related devotion and desire to obey Biblical commandments, even though they are contrary to our corrupt human nature. The church member must show signs of being guided by God's Holy Spirit.
Okay, granted she was probably nervous, but for a televised event, one would think she would be better prepared, but fatigue may have been factor. She provides an another opportunity for people to believe and spread the dumb blonde myth. She may be a very intelligent person that had a battle with nerves, but probably many out there will not give her a break, which is too bad.
CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
MORRIS, LEON. (1989) Jesus is the Christ: Studies in the Theology of John, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.
The Vick jury.
My views on predestination and election are in general terms in line with Reformed Presbyterian, and in some cases Reformed Baptist thought. I have two Baptist friends that have somewhat argued with me on this doctrine over the last few years, but have admitted that my argument has some merit. I have two Anglican friends that have argued with me, with one claiming that God would be a monster if what I am stating were true. I have a Roman Catholic friend who disagrees with my view.
ReplyDeleteI spent four years at Columbia Bible College (CBC), a Mennonite college, hearing the view at times that God chooses everyone and that some choose to believe and some do not. This was troubling to me as my professors also wanted to deny sin nature, and instead wanted to postulate the idea of sinful position. A serious problem for me was that even before I took my first theology degree at Canadian Baptist Seminary at Trinity Western University (my CBC degree was in Biblical Studies), Scripture to me in places like Romans 1-3 made it clear that human beings rejected God by nature and choice and therefore God must regenerate persons for salvation to occur. This was God's choice. God may see certain things in some that he did not in others, but seemingly no person alive with a fallen nature would choose God on their own. They needed to be regenerated. There are calls in Scripture to repent, but some within the Reformed camp have the very good explanation that God uses human sources such as preaching, and the word of God, to influence persons through the Holy Spirit to repent. Biblical repentance in my view, is obviously conditional on belief, but God can move a person towards belief and repentance through the Biblical call to repent.
Erickson acknowledges that God is stated to desire that none should perish and wishes all to come to repentance in 2 Peter 3:9. Erickson (1994: 361). Here we need to consider the idea that God has a perfect will and permissible will. God will often allow things such as sin within a fallen creation with his permissible will. I reason, as does Erickson, that God, in not electing all to salvation is using his permissible will, but God does not tell us in Scripture why he elects someone, but it seems apparent that it is not because he knows who shall believe in him, because God must make the initial choice to regenerate a person before one can believe.
I have come to my theological understanding through years of study. I do not claim to have all the answers, but think that God has guided me to this understanding. I have debated educated intelligent people on this topic, and have read top scholars who oppose soft determinism, but I find that much of their opinion is based on the largely false, non-Biblical assumption that human beings can choose to follow good or evil, God or the devil. Although human beings can choose not to commit certain evil acts, Romans 3:23 points out that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and 6:23 explains that the penalty for sin is death, and the free gift of God is everlasting life in Christ. Yes, persons must accept this gift, but a nature dedicated to sin makes this impossible unless God first decides to regenerate a person who can at the time of regeneration simultaneously willingly believe and trust in Christ. If anyone is a monster, it is not God, but the corrupt human beings who by nature and choice willingly reject God would be closer to monsters. This is hard me for as a human being to accept, but reason and revelation leads me to this conclusion.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
Hello Russ,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments on my blogs; I really appreciate it.
Later, Take care,
JME
Cheers, Jimmy.
ReplyDeleteRuss
Yeah, that drummer acts a bit like Animal, with his mouth open while drumming.
ReplyDeleteruss, why do people call blondes dumb? i also heard that phrase in "legally blonde". Is it a reality or its just that stats and demographics dictates that there are lots of blondes that are dumb? im really at lost.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Army.
ReplyDeleteThe wikipedia article states:
The dumb blonde is a popular-culture stereotype typically applied to people with blonde hair color, most frequently women. The archetypical "dumb blonde", while attractive and popular, lacks both common street-sense and academic intelligence, often to a comedic level.
Like many popular-culture stereotypes, the origins of this concept are murky. The 1925 Anita Loos novel Gentlemen Prefer Blondes: The Illuminating Diary of a Professional Lady (later used as source for a film by the same name made by Howard Hawks and starring Marilyn Monroe) featured the character Lorelei Lee, a beautiful but empty-headed singer. While some look to this as the source for the concept, in fact, it might be far older.
blonde
Re: United Church Article:
ReplyDeleteI have always believed that just as there are physical laws in the universe, there are spiritual laws as well. It seems very obvious that Mr. Murray (soon to be Dr. Muray) has clearly laid out a very convincing position using Scripture to rebuttal the United Church's TV Ad. Although many people might not like his article for obvious reasons, this does not make it untrue. Human opinion, feelings, emotions, and political correctness must never supersede truth and fact!
-Bare Buff Truth-
Mr. Buff
ReplyDeleteI like to be nice on my blogs and non-offensive, but at that the same time I need to come to honest, scholarly conclusions. When I speculate, I hope and pray that it is done intelligently.
Cheers,
Russ