Let's be reasonable with one another, shall we?

Thursday, March 22, 2007

Isn't Any Other View of God's Working in Salvation an Anthropocentric Gospel?

Here are a couple of words that are bandied about quite a bit: anthropocentric and theocentric.

Anthropocentric = man-centered
Theocentric = God-centered

Some say that if we discuss man’s responsibility to receive Christ and the work that He alone accomplished on Calvary, then the gospel we teach is anthropocentric. They say that the insistence that people can respond to this gospel ... having been drawn by the Holy Spirit, before regeneration ... is an anthropocentric idea and not true Grace. Only the "Doctrines of Grace" truly present the theocentric view of salvation.

Let me illustrate the absurdity of this charge against the non-Calvinist by showing you a conversation:

Louie says:
“Calvinism = the gospel.”

Now, I just think that is a very bad statement to make. It elevates a theological system above its proper realm. I think Spurgeon originally said this. Too bad.

Sam quotes Dr. Daniel Akin (a four point Calvinist ):
"Calvinism is not the Gospel. The Gospel is the Gospel. The Gospel is the death, the burial, the resurrection of Jesus Christ as the perfect atonement for the forgiveness of sins. You might argue that the basic system of Calvinism is consistent with the Gospel, but Calvinism is not the Gospel."

Sam repeats the statement of Dr. Akin in his own words, thus:
The Gospel is the death, the burial, the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a perfect atonement for the forgiveness of sins.

Amen; only because of this truth of the gospel can one of Adam's lost race have the life of God within him and live forever with the Father.

Now, Randy (who really likes to use this word theocentric to puff up his Calvinistic stance) says this to Sam about Sam's gospel statement (in the blue):
You have omitted "for whom." I suggest to you that the object of the work of Christ is equally essential as the work and the worker. Christ did not do some abstract work: Christ did something in particular for "us" (cf. 1Cor 15:3).


Now, while I don't disagree with the statement itself, Randy is using it to buttress the focus on the idea of the "unconditionally elect." He is saying that to say "Christ died for sinners" is not enough; we must be more specific to say that Christ died for the elect, or that is not the gospel. This conversation reveals a telling fact.

Who is teaching the anthropocentric message here? Since Calvinism is all about the “elect” and turns men’s thoughts to who those elect are ... and when and why did God choose them, etc… could it not be said that this is the anthropocentric gospel?

I believe such speculation about the "elect" is an unhealthy endeavor. We should keep our eyes on Jesus and the work that He has done and not consider the "limits" that some would like to place on it - it is much too anthropocentric!

There is nothing anthropocentric about a gospel presentation that does not include the doctrines of "election." The fact that whosoever believes into Christ has eternal life and that we are to spread the gospel to every man, telling them that this grace is available from Christ for them is not any more anthropocentric than the alternative. Telling men of this "particular redemption" of TULIP (see my sidebar if you don't know what I am talking about), and causing them to wonder if they are one of the particular ones for who Christ died is a much quicker way to get the focus off of God. In fact, I would say that the concept of "particular redemption" is quite a bit more man-focused.

31 Comments:

  • This is a re-working of a post I did on the group blog back in March of 2006.
    I re-worked it a bit and am posting it here so I can include it in my handy sidebar series "Questions Calvinists Ask" for quick reference.

    By Blogger Rose~, at 3/22/2007 1:17 PM  

  • Another great post, Rose!

    Rose: "Who is teaching the anthropocentric message here? Since Calvinism is all about the “elect” and turns men’s thoughts to who those elect are ... and when and why did God choose them, etc… could it not be said that this is the anthropocentric gospel?"

    Indeed!

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/22/2007 1:38 PM  

  • *Some say that if we discuss man’s responsibility to receive Christ and the work that He alone accomplished on Calvary, then the gospel we teach is anthropocentric.*

    The issue is not so much "man's responsibility to receive Christ etc.," because this is equally believed by the Calvinist. The charge of being anthropocentric comes more from the insistence of non Calvinists that God (in effect) is playing second fiddle to the sinner. "Who made you to differ?" (1 Corinthians 4:7) The Calvinist says "God" - The non Calvinist ultimately (and in effect) says "Me!"

    By Blogger goodnightsafehome, at 3/22/2007 2:10 PM  

  • You are on a roll here Rose, I really concur with the logic presented here.

    By Blogger Jim, at 3/22/2007 2:48 PM  

  • Rose, good answer.

    Goodnight, God chooses one person to salvation and passes over another.

    Is that choice based on some characteristic in that person (either posessed or to be posessed in the future)?

    or

    Is the choice purely abitrary, without regard to any characteristic whatever?

    or

    Is there some third possibility as to the reason for the choice?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/22/2007 4:23 PM  

  • Rose, your reasoning is excellent, as far as I am concerned. You have made an excellent observation. God Bless.

    By Blogger David Wyatt, at 3/22/2007 7:47 PM  

  • I thought it wise to further reflect on your excellent essay but then recanted and decided instead so simply say ...

    "Sis, you da bomb!"

    ...Ahem.

    By Blogger Kc, at 3/22/2007 9:23 PM  

  • Rose, this is a good post. We Calvinists need to be careful not to say this and that shouldn't be included in the Gospel when the authors of Scripture might use that very language.

    By Blogger Jonathan Moorhead, at 3/23/2007 12:52 AM  

  • Very well, done, Rose.

    By Anonymous Gordon Cloud, at 3/23/2007 3:21 AM  

  • Good Morning, Rose (and DF) too: If I may refer you to my exit statement over on the other page on why one believes and another doesn't.

    By Blogger goodnightsafehome, at 3/23/2007 5:01 AM  

  • Good morning, Rose.

    Goodnight, your statement does not really answer my question.

    If God has chosen some to salvation and passed over others, there must be a reason for His choice.

    I can only see two possibilities here. Either God has chosen the Elect because of positive or negative qualities (they are more foolish or weaker than those He passed over?) that they posess or else His choice is purely abitrary and arguably random.

    Is there another logical possibility that I am missing?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/23/2007 10:43 AM  

  • Matthew, Matthew, Matthew...you know that you know the answer to that already.

    God does what He does (in any arena) according to His good pleasure. And I bet you even know the texts to support it.

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/23/2007 12:56 PM  

  • Gayla,
    Are you going to comment on the post or just tease Matthew? :~)

    By Blogger Rose~, at 3/23/2007 1:15 PM  

  • Thanks everyone for reading. You are all very kind to comment.

    By Blogger Rose~, at 3/23/2007 1:16 PM  

  • Gayla, so is it God's pleasure to choose persons on the basis of characteristics they posessed, posess or will posess

    or

    is it God's pleasure to choose persons abitrarily (or arguably, at random)?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/23/2007 3:42 PM  

  • Matthew, I think, according to Scripture, God chooses based on His own desires. He TELLS us that He does whatever He pleases.

    Arbitrary has several similar meanings, one of which is:

    1. subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.

    Do you know of any place in Scripture which would indicate that God does anythng according to reasons other than His own pleasure, His will, for the sake of His name? etc I contend that the overarching theme throughout the Word is God's sovereign rule and reign over all His creation. I don't think we're on the same page with that one, though.

    Does Scripture tell us why God chose Noah? In his introduction in Gen 6:8 it says, But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord. (favor or grace - from a Hebrew word meaning to bend or stoop; unmerited - of a superior person to an inferior one)

    Do we know why God chose Abraham? In the introduction to his calling in Gen 12:1 it says, Now the Lord said to Abram, "Go forth from your country and from your relatives and from your father's house, to the land whish I will show you." Etc, etc.

    Why did God choose Moses? The calling of Moses, in Exodus 3, gives no indication that there was anything inherently in him (good or bad) that God would choose him. And as we all know, Moses had even committed murder.

    Do we know why God chose Jeremiah? In Jer 1:4-5, Jeremiah says, Now the word of the Lord came to me saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations."

    Was there anything Jeremiah did?

    Samuel?

    David? In 1 Samuel 16:3, the Lord says to him (Samuel), "You shall invite Jesse to the sacrifice and I will show you what you shall do; and you shall anoint for Me the one whome I designate to you"

    John the Baptist? Luke 1:15, ...and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother's womb.

    Saul/Paul? We all know the story of how God chose him. Another murderer.

    Jacob and Esau? Rom 9:11 -for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls (And before anyone says that this is referring to nations, remember God dealth with these men as INDIVIDUALS.)

    Anyway, these are but a few examples; this comment is getting rather lengthy.

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/23/2007 5:46 PM  

  • So you think that God chooses the elect wihout regard to any characteristics they posessed, posess or will posess?

    Would it not be logical to conclude that this is in fact a random selection? That it is a decision not to exercise choice rather than a genuine choice?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/23/2007 5:51 PM  

  • Of the definitions given I think no.4 is what I am thinking of:

    4. capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/23/2007 5:53 PM  

  • Matthew, does #4 reflect your view God, or is it what you're asking me about how I view God?

    If #4 reflects your view of God, then I would suggest your view of God is skewed. And the reason I say that is because the Scriptures do not reveal the nature of God's character as being ureasonable or capricious (erratic, varible, flighty, fickle, etc)

    I think a right view of God is more in line with #1. His choices/His will/His purposes/His plans are 'subject to individual(God's) will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's(God's) discretion' - for the purpose I stated above, namely His glory, His renown, His name.

    So you think that God chooses the elect wihout regard to any characteristics they posessed, posess or will posess?

    See my above comment. Additionally, the characteristics that the elect possess are the same as all people in an unregenterated state. The elect, before conversion, are children of wrath, enemies of God, dead in trespasses and sin, etc...

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/25/2007 3:13 PM  

  • It seems the view you are taking reflects no.4.

    If God chooses people without regard to any characteristics they posess, then He surely makes a choice that is without reason; hence an unreasonable choice.

    Is this not in practice the same as choosing a random sample?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/25/2007 4:51 PM  

  • "then He surely makes a choice that is without reason; hence an unreasonable choice."

    That God doesn't reveal all His reasons for everything He does, certainly doesn't make His choices unreasonable.

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/25/2007 5:08 PM  

  • Gayla, if there is a reason for God choosing a person, that reason must surely relate to a characteristic posessed by that person.

    How is it logically possible for God to choose a person because of a reason that bears no relation to any characteristic posessed by that person?

    By Blogger Dyspraxic Fundamentalist, at 3/26/2007 6:24 AM  

  • Hi Rose. Thanks for the opportunity to post. I apologize in advance for the long post, but I just could not let this one go. And I'm not yelling when I type in all caps, so please do not take it that way.

    I humbly submit that there IS a reason that God chooses whom He chooses for His purposes. That reason is that He knows their hearts or He has foreknowledge of what the condition of their hearts will be. Only God knows the “complete” reason He chooses some for specific services. All these people you have mentioned were chosen for specific services.

    As for salvation, we know that it is by faith that we are saved through grace. Therefore, it is also a condition of the heart. And these whom God chose for specific services were also saved due to the condition of their hearts and not for no reason.

    Romans 10:10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

    John 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

    Noah

    I think that Noah was a man who feared God and that that is why he found favor in the eyes of God. He came from the line of Seth which is a line known to have feared and served the Lord. (Yes, I realize that just because a family serves the Lord that it does not mean that the “entire” family will automatically serve the Lord: e.g., Eli’s sons.) The bible says that Noah was a just and perfect man before God and he walked with God. The book of Hebrews tells us that it was by FAITH that Noah obeyed God and built an ark and warned the people to repent. Faith shows the condition of the heart.

    Abraham

    The bible doesn’t tell us why Abraham was selected, but it does tell us that he obeyed the Lord by getting out of Ur. Abraham did this by FAITH. Faith shows the condition of the heart. So probably God chose Abraham due to the condition of his heart.

    Moses

    The life of Moses before God called him to deliver His people from Egypt shows the condition of Moses’ heart.

    Hebrews 11:24-27By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward. By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.

    Again, faith shows the condition of one’s heart.

    Jeremiah

    Jeremiah 1:5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

    Foreknowledge of the condition of Jeremiah’s heart could be the case for the reason as to why God chose Jeremiah to be a prophet from even before he was formed in the womb. There is no indication that God made Jeremiah believe in God and serve Him before He was physically called to be a prophet.

    Gayla:Was there anything Jeremiah did?

    How do you know that God’s choice wasn’t because of something He had foreseen in Jeremiah?

    Samuel
    Samuel was a worshiper of the Lord. Samuel obeyed the word of the Lord prior to his being called for the service of a prophet. Obviously the condition of his heart was good. Look at Eli’s sons. They had the same upbringing, but their hearts were evil. I humbly submit that it was the condition of Samuel’s heart that played a part in God’s decision to make him a prophet.

    David

    1 Samuel 16:3And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will shew thee what thou shalt do: and thou shalt anoint unto me him whom I name unto thee.

    1 Samuel 16:7But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart. (emphasis added)

    1 Samuel 16:11-13And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither. And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he. Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.

    God tells us plain and simple that He looks upon the heart.

    John the Baptist

    God doesn’t tell us why He chose John the Baptist, but it could be that He foreknew the heart of John the Baptist.

    Saul/Paul

    Paul was a worshiper of God. God knew the condition of Paul’s heart. He was not like the Pharisees who were hypocritical in their “service of God.” He obviously truly worshiped the Lord.

    1 Timothy 1:12-13And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

    Jacob and Esau

    Another possible account of God’s foreknowledge. And, yes, we all know that God deals with each of us individually. However, God is talking about two nations that would be born of the seed of Isaac. (Genesis 25:22-23) God chose one to be the stronger of the two and said that one would serve the other. God was not saying that He chose one to go to heaven and one to go to hell. He is speaking of service here.

    Gayla:: “Do you know of any place in Scripture which would indicate that God does anythng according to reasons other than His own pleasure, His will, for the sake of His name? etc

    We’re not saying that He doesn’t do things according to reasons other than His own pleasure, His will, or for His name’s sake. Thankfully, He’s not left us completely in the dark about what those things are! But you’re leaving out the part about God’s love toward his creation. He loves us and that is ALSO a reason that He does the things He does. It is BECAUSE He LOVES us that it pleases Him to save those who believe.

    What is His own pleasure and His will where salvation is concerned? It was His will to come in the flesh in the form of His Son to die for the sins of EVERY MAN. It’s to save those who believe through Jesus Christ, to make them holy and without blame, to make them heirs to the kingdom, to be the praise of His glory, etc.

    Hebrews 2:9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

    John 1:12-13But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

    John 3:15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

    1 Corinthians 1:21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

    Ephesians 1:4-14According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

    Colossians 1:18-20And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

    Isaiah 53:10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

    All this IS for His Name’s sake! Why is it for His Name's sake? I humbly submit that it is BECAUSE He is showing that HE IS LOVE (merciful, longsuffering, just, holy, etc.) and He's PROVING His LOVE for His creation FOR His Name's sake. ALL of what we see in the bible is for His Glory. The glorious love that He has for US! The entire book is about Jesus. What about Jesus? He is the SAVIOR of mankind! If it weren't about mankind, why would there be a need for Jesus to come and save mankind?

    Gayla:I contend that the overarching theme throughout the Word is God's sovereign rule and reign over all His creation.

    I contend that the overarching theme throughout the Word is both God’s sovereign rule and reign over all His creation AND His LOVE for all of mankind and the rest of His creation.

    John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

    Romans 5:8 "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

    God's love for us does not take one iota away from His sovereignty.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/26/2007 1:49 PM  

  • Gayla: "That God doesn't reveal all His reasons for everything He does, certainly doesn't make His choices unreasonable."

    You are right that God does not reveal all His reasons for everything and that it does not make His choices unreasonable. But thankfully, He does show us in part why He makes certain choices.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/26/2007 1:52 PM  

  • With due respect, Dawn, with the verses you've cited, you're projecting meanings and conclusions that are just not there.

    And some of what you've stated is flat incorrect.

    Example:

    Saul/Paul

    Paul was a worshiper of God. God knew the condition of Paul’s heart. He was not like the Pharisees who were hypocritical in their “service of God.” He obviously truly worshiped the Lord


    Oh my, Dawn. Do you know the story of Paul???? I'd suggest you go back and read. Saul was a persecutor and murderer Christians when the Lord showed up on the road to Damascus. I'm not sure where you get that he was a worshipper of God. ???


    John the Baptist

    God doesn’t tell us why He chose John the Baptist, but it could be that He foreknew the heart of John the Baptist.


    Exactly. He doesn't tell us. So why are you projecting? What we're NEVER told is that God chooses for reasons that are inherent in a person, that He 'looks down the corrider of time to see who will "choose" Him. That's simply not biblical. Just as with Jacob and Esau, we're specifically told: for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, ~Rom 9:11 Again, God dealth with as MEN, as INDIVIDUAL people. I'm not saying that the symbolism of the nations isn't there, rather, that is not the only thing in play.


    All this IS for His Name’s sake! Why is it for His Name's sake?

    Here again I'd encourage you to do some reading. You'll find that God is about Himself, first and foremost. He is about His glory and His name. You'll find a slew of text which will show you that God does exactly what He does for the sake of His name.

    For the record, I've never said that God doesn't love us. Certainly He does. However, 'we' do not stand supreme or center, God does.

    Gotta run...

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/26/2007 4:29 PM  

  • As an aside: We must look at what the verse says, not what we'd like it to say.

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/26/2007 4:30 PM  

  • Gayla: "With due respect, Dawn, with the verses you've cited, you're projecting meanings and conclusions that are just not there."

    They are not there specifically in some cases, but that's why we have 66 books from which we may glean.

    Gayla: "Oh my, Dawn. Do you know the story of Paul???? I'd suggest you go back and read. Saul was a persecutor and murderer Christians when the Lord showed up on the road to Damascus. I'm not sure where you get that he was a worshipper of God. ???"

    Yes, I know the story of Paul very well. I probably did not explain myself properly. What I was saying is that even though Paul had persecuted the christians He had done it "thinking" he was doing God a favor. He was a worshiper of God. He was shown mercy because of his doing these things "in ignorance and unbelief." To me, that is showing the true intent of Paul's heart. Jesus chose to appear before Paul and Paul believed. (Why God chose to go that far with Paul is a mystery to me.) And the other reason God chose Paul to be an apostle was to show God's longsuffering to even one who would persecute christians.

    1 Timothy 1:13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief."

    1 Timothy 1:16 "Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting."

    Gayla: "Exactly. He doesn't tell us [why He chose John the Baptist]. So why are you projecting?"

    I'm saying that it COULD have been for the reason of foreknowledge.

    Why are you projecting that man is born again before he can believe when the exact opposite it taught in scripture?

    Why are you projecting that there is NO reason that a person is chosen to salvation when it is clear that it is due to one's faith/belief that a person is chosen for salvation?

    Why are you projecting that unregenerate man is incapable of responding to the gospel when it is clear that we are indeed capable?

    Gayla: "What we're NEVER told is that God chooses for reasons that are inherent in a person, that He 'looks down the corrider of time to see who will "choose" Him. That's simply not biblical."

    Romans 8:29 "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."

    God chooses on belief/faith.

    Gayla: "Just as with Jacob and Esau, we're specifically told: for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, ~Rom 9:11"

    No one has ever said it was due to works. It is due to the condition of their heart. I'm saying that it COULD have been due to the foreknowledge of God. He knows the hearts before they've done good or bad. You don't know that He didn't choose on foreknowledge of the heart now do you?

    Having said that, if God did not choose Jacob over Esau for service due to foreknowledge, that's fine with me.

    Gayla: "Again, God dealth with as MEN, as INDIVIDUAL people. I'm not saying that the symbolism of the nations isn't there, rather, that is not the only thing in play."

    When Paul is speaking of Esau and Jacob in this context he is speaking of their election in service. He's not speaking of their salvation.

    I agree that he deals with men individually.

    Gayla: "Here again I'd encourage you to do some reading. You'll find that God is about Himself, first and foremost. He is about His glory and His name. You'll find a slew of text which will show you that God does exactly what He does for the sake of His name."

    I've never said that He isn't about Himself first and foremost or that He isn't about His glory and His name. I'm saying that it is about both. God reigns SUPREME, but Mankind IS at the center of the universe. We are fearfully and wonderfully made. We are made in HIS image. And it is God's love for us that caused Him to become flesh and die a humiliating, painful death to save us from our sin.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/26/2007 11:14 PM  

  • Gayla: "As an aside: We must look at what the verse says, not what we'd like it to say."

    Right back atcha.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/26/2007 11:15 PM  

  • Dawn, We shall have to agree to disagree.

    By Blogger Gayla, at 3/27/2007 9:56 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/27/2007 3:12 PM  

  • Gayla: "Dawn, We shall have to agree to disagree."

    Yes Gayla, we will have to agree to disagree.

    By Blogger Dawn, at 3/27/2007 3:13 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

 

Who Links Here