Is the Gift of Salvation nullified by the consequences of refusal?

[O'Darby]

Yes. That's essentially what I am saying. No loving father would do it that way.


That's essentially Christian Universalism in a crude form. - LOL


The atheists make a good point.
I have often asked why Christian think God holds us to a higher standard of conduct than himself.
If we were to be more godly, what would that look like? Incinerating your enemies? Yikes!

/

Which is why a literalist sort of Christianity is (it seems to me) a mental house of cards that requires the believer to continually make excuses for God. God is Perfect Love, Perfect Holiness, Perfect Wisdom and Perfect Justice. He creates humans with free will and allows supernatural evil to roam freely among them, knowing that the slightest sin - which is 100% inevitable - will estrange them from Him and require His Perfect Justice to be satisfied. He makes provision to satisfy His Perfect Justice through the life and death of His Son and makes this satisfaction available to sinful humans as a gift. But those who don't accept will receive hideous eternal torment, which doesn't sound to most (if any) humans anything like either Perfect Love or Perfect Justice and might reasonably cause them to question His Perfect Holiness and Perfect Wisdom in creating this scheme in the first place.

It just doesn't "work" in any way that is emotionally or intellectually satisfying - which is why literalists are continually forced to chalk it all up to God's mysterious ways. But if humans are made in God's image and our familial relationships model and reflect God's relationship with us, then how is it possible that God's love, wisdom and justice seem SO DIFFERENT from that of any human father this side of an abusive monster?

Which, of course, makes me sound like "not a Christian at all" to the Bible-worshippers, whereas I'm more inclined to believe that this house of cards isn't, and simply can't be, correct. The Good News simply has to be something better. The Bible-worshippers are as a big a mystery to me as I am to them. It always occurs to me that if I latched on to Ancient Egyptian or Sumerian religious texts in the same obsessively literalist way the Bible-worshippers latch on to the Bible, pretty much everyone would think I was completely insane. It's a very odd dynamic, at least to moi.

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
You seem to be on both sides of the definition. - LOL
Above you say, "... a "gift" is, is defined by Him who gives it, and not by him who rejects it."
Before that you wrote:

ScottA said:
A gift is only a gift, if received. If it is not received, it is just an offer.

That's because there are two sides to the salvation gift versus offer equation.

Two sides?
Please explain. Thanks.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

Which is why a literalist sort of Christianity is (it seems to me) a mental house of cards that requires the believer to continually make excuses for God. God is Perfect Love, Perfect Holiness, Perfect Wisdom and Perfect Justice. He creates humans with free will and allows supernatural evil to roam freely among them, knowing that the slightest sin - which is 100% inevitable - will estrange them from Him and require His Perfect Justice to be satisfied. He makes provision to satisfy His Perfect Justice through the life and death of His Son and makes this satisfaction available to sinful humans as a gift. But those who don't accept will receive hideous eternal torment, which doesn't sound to most (if any) humans anything like either Perfect Love or Perfect Justice and might reasonably cause them to question His Perfect Holiness and Perfect Wisdom in creating this scheme in the first place.

I remember coming of age in my faith as a young.
Hell was the fly in the ointment. Everything else seemed to make sense.

It just doesn't "work" in any way that is emotionally or intellectually satisfying - which is why literalists are continually forced to chalk it all up to God's mysterious ways. But if humans are made in God's image and our familial relationships model and reflect God's relationship with us, then how is it possible that God's love, wisdom and justice seem SO DIFFERENT from that of any human father this side of an abusive monster?

Yes. If one stops to think about it, it comes unraveled pretty quickly.
The hard part, I suppose, is to put it back together so it makes sense.

My first big hurdle was realizing that if "hell" wasn't eternal, then neither was eternal life. Say what?
I finally figured out that one Age is followed by the next Age. (whew) "Eternal" = aionios (age long)

Matthew 25:46 NIV
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Which, of course, makes me sound like "not a Christian at all" to the Bible-worshippers, whereas I'm more inclined to believe that this house of cards isn't, and simply can't be, correct. The Good News simply has to be something better. The Bible-worshippers are as a big a mystery to me as I am to them. It always occurs to me that if I latched on to Ancient Egyptian or Sumerian religious texts in the same obsessively literalist way the Bible-worshippers latch on to the Bible, pretty much everyone would think I was completely insane. It's a very odd dynamic, at least to moi.

Agree.
Children seem to understand (accept) this heaven and hell concept at a very early age.
Our western culture is saturated with it.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

My first big hurdle was realizing that if "hell" wasn't eternal, then neither was eternal life. Say what?
I finally figured out that one Age is followed by the next Age. (whew) "Eternal" = aionios (age long)

Aionios mistranslated as "eternal" and "everlasting" in Matthew 25:46.

All these verses below use the same NT Greek word, "aionios", the Greek word mistranslated
as "eternal" and "everlasting" in Matthew 25:46. See bold below.
This shows that "aionios" cannot mean eternal or everlasting.

Matthew 13:22
The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life
and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful.

Romans 12:2
Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.
Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.

1 Corinthians 1:20
Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age?
Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1 Corinthians 2:8
None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Ephesians 2:2
in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of
the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient.

Galatians 1:4-5 KJV
Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world,
according to the will of God and our Father:5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Luke 18:29-30
“Truly I tell you,” Jesus said to them, “no one who has left home or wife or brothers or sisters
or parents or children for the sake of the kingdom of God 30 will fail to receive many times as much in this age,
and in the age to come eternal life.”

Compare: Matthew 12:32; Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Luke 20:35; Ephesians 1:21

Aionios, the Greek word mistranslated as "eternal" and "everlasting" in the Bible (eternal hell?)

/

 

[ScottA]

There might be even more sides than that! Scripture talks about ankle deep, shin deep, waist deep, shoulder deep and swimming over your head!

And you dont get to go into the deep end until you show that you can swim. We all have a race to run. The gift is free but moving up is done though effort, faith, walking in it.

It puzzles a little but perhaps it becoming clearer. Scripture describes the Fathers house. It's like, 1500 miles wide X 1500 miles long X 1500 miles tall, right? (That's prolly enough room for everyone if they climb that high!), but it also talks about people who live outside also. I don't think scripture is exactly clear on who lives where, but it stands to reason that those who live outside are like, the commoners and the ones insde are the royalty? (They have a better position in heaven, more amenities perhaps?) All of them have eternal life, but some have it better than others.

I want to have a nice wardrobe in heaven. The fine linen is the righteousness of the saints. That's us. Living in town with a nice wardrobe sounds better than living on the outskirts in a shack.

What's the difference between Anointings and Mantles? There are greater aniontings which come to some after a success somewhere, a breakthrough. I hear them talk about putting on Mantles and stuff and it sort of sounds like sargeant stripes or something? To more who is given, more is required. So climbing the mountain of God get's more difficult the higher you get. And the higher you are if you slip and fall is the more damage that you have done by that fall. Get back up!

In the house of God, there is family, and then there is family. All is glorious, all have rest, peace, love, and joy abounding.

 

[ScottA]

St. SteVen said:
You seem to be on both sides of the definition. - LOL
Above you say, "... a "gift" is, is defined by Him who gives it, and not by him who rejects it."
Before that you wrote:

ScottA said:
A gift is only a gift, if received. If it is not received, it is just an offer.

Two sides?
Please explain. Thanks.

/

That was the explanation of a gift only being a gift if it is received, and otherwise only an offer (as defined by God from the gift side, but defined differently by those who refuse the gift--by their own doing, not God's doing. God's doing is all gift).

So, yes, two sides: the side of the Giver of the gift of salvation, and the side of those to whom the gift is given, which some refuse as an offer and gift not received.

 

[St. SteVen]

From the OP.

What is the nature of a "gift"?
- It's free.
- You can't earn it.
- Nothing is expected in return. (hopefully, or it isn't free)
- Consequences for refusal would make it extortion.

/

 

[O'Darby]

Consequences for refusal would make it extortion.

To argue a bit against myself, we could say that the hideous consequences aren't really consequences of refusing the gift. They are the consequences of sinning. They are already in place regardless of whether the gift is accepted or refused. The gift is a way of avoiding those consequences. The real issue, or so it seems to me, is what sort of thinking sees those hideous consequences as consistent with Perfect Holiness, Love, Justice and Wisdom. The explanation has to be that God's Justice is so demanding that the slightest sin requires the most hideous consequences, completely overriding God's Love, which once again is inconsistent with any human father we can imagine.

 

[Duck Muscles]

- Consequences for refusal would make it extortion.

/

Please explain your reasoning there.

 

[St. SteVen]

To argue a bit against myself, we could say that the hideous consequences aren't really consequences of refusing the gift. They are the consequences of sinning.

Agree. (sort of)
What I am claiming is that the church uses the offer of the "free gift of salvation" to gain converts. (gospel message)

I agree with you that the consequences are for "sinning" (sort of)
Everyone in Adam's race is under condemnation. (sort of) - LOL

They are already in place regardless of whether the gift is accepted or refused. The gift is a way of avoiding those consequences.

Personally...
I don't think anyone will avoid "consequences". (life review/rewards/correction/restoration)

Mark 9:49 NIV
Everyone will be salted with fire.

The real issue, or so it seems to me, is what sort of thinking sees those hideous consequences as consistent with Perfect Holiness, Love, Justice and Wisdom.

Cognitive dissonance. (once again)

The explanation has to be that God's Justice is so demanding that the slightest sin requires the most hideous consequences, completely overriding God's Love, which once again is inconsistent with any human father we can imagine.

Right. A complete contradiction.
Seems the only way to resolve that problem is to start with God's character and work it out from there.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
- Consequences for refusal would make it extortion.

Please explain your reasoning there.

Thanks for your question.
What I wrote may seem shocking. I bring lots of challenges to the forum.

The standard dogma makes our loving heavenly Father into something that
resembles a gangster godfather making us "an offer we can't refuse."

Here's how it might look in human terms.

Man #1: I have a free gift for you.
Man #2: Thanks, But I'm not interested.
Man #1: Not interested? I said it was free!
Man #2: I'm pretty sure there are some strings attached.
Man #1: Well, of course. But it's FREE!
Man #2: Not really, if there are strings attached.
Man #1: This is my final offer. Better take it now, or else!
Man #2: Uh... or else what?
Man #1: You will be incinerated!
Man #2: Seriously? What kind of free gift is that?

/

 

[Duck Muscles]

View attachment 43645St. SteVen said:
- Consequences for refusal would make it extortion.

Thanks for your question.
What I wrote may seem shocking. I bring lots of challenges to the forum.

The standard dogma makes our loving heavenly Father into something that
resembles a gangster godfather making us "an offer we can't refuse."

Here's how it might look in human terms.

Man #1: I have a free gift for you.
Man #2: Thanks, But I'm not interested.
Man #1: Not interested? I said it was free!
Man #2: I'm pretty sure there are some strings attached.
Man #1: Well, of course. But it's FREE!
Man #2: Not really, if there are strings attached.
Man #1: This is my final offer. Better take it now, or else!
Man #2: Uh... or else what?
Man #1: You will be incinerated!
Man #2: Seriously? What kind of free gift is that?

/

What is your non standard dogma then?

 

[St. SteVen]

If we can't see that God is right, just and fair in all that He does and says, then we have serious problems with God. This is where we begin to question any and everything through our limited knowledge and lose track of who's in charge.

Great to see you on the forum. I haven't seen you in a while.

Since "God is right, just and fair in all that He does" the church got it wrong. What do they say?

How can we "see that God is right, just and fair in all that He does and says" if we have limited knowledge? How do we know?

It boils down to the question: do we really trust God? If we can't trust Him, then we can't believe Him, and now you're in Satan's ballpark.

I trust God.
But I don't trust what the church is telling us about him.
Unfortunately the church has become "Satan's ballpark."

/

 

[St. SteVen]

What is your non standard dogma then?

The gift of salvation is ONLY free in the sense that we cannot earn it.

/

 

[Duck Muscles]

The gift of salvation is ONLY free in the sense that we cannot earn it.

/

Yes, that is the standard meaning of free. No payment, no effort to attain.

However, "only", in your statement implies a condition otherwise?

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
We are told that there is eternal punishment for a temporal crime. How is that right, just and fair?

Oh, yes... it's because our minds are too tiny to comprehend why God is so cruel.
What would we know about cruelty? (plenty) Who doesn't know a playground bully when they see one?

We can't trust the "God" the church has given us. The "gun to your head" gospel is obviously wrong.

You should be searching the Scripture to find why God is always right, and why fallen man is wrong.

I'm clear on those points.
Why would you assume otherwise?

/

 

[Duck Muscles]

To argue a bit against myself, we could say that the hideous consequences aren't really consequences of refusing the gift. They are the consequences of sinning. They are already in place regardless of whether the gift is accepted or refused. The gift is a way of avoiding those consequences. The real issue, or so it seems to me, is what sort of thinking sees those hideous consequences as consistent with Perfect Holiness, Love, Justice and Wisdom. The explanation has to be that God's Justice is so demanding that the slightest sin requires the most hideous consequences, completely overriding God's Love, which once again is inconsistent with any human father we can imagine.

Would you say the consequence of refusing the gift is remaining as born, condemned?

Is that then a consequence or a condition of being born?

 

[St. SteVen]

Christ laid down His life for the Church, so if you have a problem with the Church, He can fix it.

I differentiate between the Body of Christ and the institutional church.
Do you know the difference?

/

 

[O'Darby]

Would you say the consequence of refusing the gift is remaining as born, condemned?

Is that then a consequence or a condition of being born?

I'm not completely following. If we are born with a sin nature (inclination toward evil), then sin and condemnation are inevitable. So I'm not sure how much practical difference there is between consequence and condition. No one offered me any choice as to whether I wanted to be born, so consequence is probably more accurate.

 

[Duck Muscles]

I'm not completely following. If we are born with a sin nature (inclination toward evil), then sin and condemnation are inevitable. So I'm not sure how much practical difference there is between consequence and condition. No one offered me any choice as to whether I wanted to be born, so consequence is probably more accurate.

Happy to elaborate.

The consequence of not accepting the free gift is contingent upon a gift being offered as necessary in the first place. Because of the human sin condition.

The offering is afforded by the same entity, God, that created the condition first. Making the later gift God's prerogative.