New Mexico, regarding 2 Peter 3:8-9, a knowledge of the Greek is critical. Please watch this video for an analysis of these verses based on the Greek words tis and pas, which read much differently in the original text than your NIV translation renders them in English.

Greg

http://www.youtube.com/v/124vIQMRRHI

[quote author="New Mexico"]
However, Jesus tore away that magic formula and taught that we would be judged by our works, not by our profession.

New Mexico, are you denying justification by faith alone?

Greg

NM,

Is salvation a gracious gift of God or a reward for our works?  It sounds like you’re advocating for the latter.  How much glory should go to God and how much to us?

Aaron

Salvation is a gift to be received, not a goal to be achieved.

Dennis Fischer

There may be a problem viewing the video I posted above, so if you are unable to see it, just click here.

Greg

[quote author="Greg"]There may be a problem viewing the video I posted above, so if you are unable to see it, just click here.

Greg

Greg,

On this link there is also another very interesting video on “decisional regeneration” linked here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzsByHcUq4&mode=related&search=

This video illustrates why most of what passes for evangelism today is routed in false concepts of what it means to be born again.

Stan

I am very fascinated by the story of the individual Mark Kielar who did the video presentation above:

http://crosstv.com/mark-kielar.html

Here is a part of his testimony:

“My initial formal Theological education came in the form of graduating from Calvary Chapel’s Bible College (1990-1994).  However, (as I have come to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and mature in faith and doctrine), I have come to differ substantially with the doctrine and ministry model of Calvary Chapel, (and in hindsight), Calvary Chapel proved (in a number of critical areas) to be doctrinally unsound.  And, therefore, God was pleased to allow me the time and opportunity to independently study His Word (through the writings and teachings and commentaries of men such as Augstine, Calvin, Martin Lloyd-Jones, Knox, Matthew Henry, Jonathan Edwards, Martin Luther, George Whitfield, etc) 30-40 hours per week, for a period in excess of 15 years.”
-------------------------------------------------

Just one more person who came to see the problems with the Calvary Chapel movement. Calvary Chapel was my first church on leaving the Adventist, then SDB church.

Sorry for the diversion from the thread’s topic, but couldn’t resist.

Stan

Sorry I didn’t answer these questions sooner, I started to post and evidently didn’t get it up.
Greg said:

Did the God who destroyed the earth with a catastrophic flood love unconditionally? How about the God who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Isn’t He the same God who commanded the Israelites to destroy entire populations of people, including infants (1 Samuel 15:3)?

So far as I know, all of these instances involved human life on this earth and didn’t indicate the eternal destination of the innocent people caught up in these calamities.

Let’s be careful not to forget the Hebrew Scriptures that describe such events, and also let’s be careful not to make baseless accusations about the God of Calvin or anyone else, for that matter. I believe the responsibility lies with you to show us that the God depicted throughout the Bible behaves the way you say He does rather than simply assigning Christians who disagree with you to a Muslim worldview.

I went back and checked to see if I had mistaken Calvin’s teaching.  So far as I can tell, Calvin’s teaching is indeed a fatalistic view of God similar to what the Muslims hold.  I’m not saying that every detail is the same since if they were Calvinists would be Muslims.  However if you examine the results of this radical position of God’s soverienty which excludes human freedom, the core qualities of Allah and the Calvinist God are the same.  Because this viewpoint makes Allah or God completely responsible for everything that happens, unless we change the definition of “love,” neither God really be said to have the quality of “love” in their character. If my understanding is correct, then why should anyone be offended if I tell the truth?  That is my understanding.

Let me give you an example.  A few years ago, I went on a Muslim web site and started talking.  There were other Christians at the site who were also having their say.  One of these Christians attacked me because he didn’t think my discussion about God’s love was strong enough.  The Muslims loved it.  I told him I would say what I believed and he was free to post what he thought.

Quite soon, I noticed the other Christians weren’t making much progress with the Muslims and eventually resorted to calling the Muslims names.  On the other hand, when I talked about God’s love, the Muslims had no answer.  If I didn’t believe God were love, as John said, I don’t know how I could ever call Muslims to Jesus.  It is God’s love which attracts them and should attract us.  They already have a God who doesn’t love them very much, only when they do what Allah wishes, and is all too willing to burn them for eternity.  I really don’t know any other way to witness to other people that to tell them about God’s love.

Gabriel said:

When it comes to our present hope, we can trust the same covenantal love, showed to us IN CHRIST, and only IN Him. It is not a love manifested indiscriminately toward every person alive at this moment, but toward a particular group of people, the New Covenant people, those who are in Christ, covered with His righteousness, cleansed by His blood, and perfect in God’s eyes only by the imputation of Christ’s meritorious obedience.

On this we will have to agree to disagree.  I believe God loves everyone on earth infinitely.  So far as I can tell, that is the message of the entire Bible, the God who loves each one of us and reaches out to save us.

Greg said:

New Mexico, regarding 2 Peter 3:8-9, a knowledge of the Greek is critical. Please watch this video for an analysis of these verses based on the Greek words tis and pas, which read much differently in the original text than your NIV translation renders them in English.

I didn’t realize that this verse is mistranslated in the NIV. If you prefer, I will post another translation. In the Greek there are two words in this text which indicates God’s love is universal.

2 Peter 3:8-9
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. NKJV

Greg said:

New Mexico, are you denying justification by faith alone?

Absolutely not.  However, the key is what faith means.  Is it another good work which people can do to make them better than everyone else so that they are the elect and most everyone else is going to hell?  According to my understanding of James, belief is not the same as faith.

Both James and Jesus said we would be judged by our works.  In fact, Jesus said belief in Him without works was not enough. I gave you the parable of the sheep and the goats which explicitly stated that point.  Here is another passage.

Luke 6:45-49
45 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?
47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and
doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.
KJV

It is very easy to take those texts which talk about justification by faith and ignore those which also specify that this faith must be accpmpanied by works.  It is also easy to think that we are the priviledged few who God loves and forget God’s universal love for everyone.  As I understand it, the faith which saves is not a mechanical faith that Jesus has kept the law and therefore we can do whatever we wish, but a faith which embraces Jesus in His entirety including His unconditional love for all people. 

To leave this thread on topic, Gabriel’s post has been moved to a new thread entitled “Is Salvation a Gift or a Reward?”. Click here to be redirected to the new thread.

The following are thoughts about a place called hell: 

The doctrine of hell appears in the New Testament as a Christian essential, and we are called to try to understand it as Jesus and his apostles did...New Testament teaching about hell is meant to appall us and strike us dumb with horror, assuring us that, as heaven will be better than we could dream, so hell will be worse than we can conceive. Such are the issues of eternity, which need now to be realistically faced.

The concept of hell is of a negative relationship with God, an experience not of his absence so much as of his presence in wrath and displeasure. The experience of God’s anger as a consuming fire (Heb. 12:29), his righteous condemnation for defying him and clinging to the sins he loathes, and the deprivation of all that is valuable, pleasant, and worthwhile will be the shape of the experience of hell (Rom. 2:6,8-9,12)…

Scripture envisages hell as unending (Jude 13; Rev. 20:10). Speculations about a “second chance” after death, or personal annihilation of the ungodly at some stage, have no biblical warrant. Scripture sees hell as self-chosen; those in hell will realize that they sentenced themselves to it by loving darkness rather than light, choosing not to have their Creator as their Lord, preferring self-indulgent sin to self-denying righteousness, and (if they encountered the gospel) rejecting Jesus rather than coming to him (John 3:18-21; Rom. 1:18;24,26,28,32;2:8; 2 Thess. 2:9-11)…

Those in hell will know not only that for their doings they deserve it but also that in their hearts they chose it. The purpose of Bible teaching about hell is to make us appreciate, thankfully embrace, and rationally prefer the grace of Christ that saves us from it (Matt. 5:29-30;13:48-50). It is really a mercy to mankind that God in Scripture is so explicit about hell. We cannot say that we have not been warned. [Excerpts taken from J. I. Packer, CONCISE THEOLOGY, pp. 261-263]

Dennis Fischer

Once again it is time to reaffirm the grand old doctrines of Holy Writ.  Below are three links, on three different topics, that are most relevant for Christian understanding:

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Eternal_Punishment/epunishment.htm

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Election/election.htm

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Security/security.htm

Dennis Fischer

I have returned from my lengthy hiatus! I did not read all the responses to this idea, I didnt have enough time.  As far as my thoughts on this topic, I have never understood Adventism as believing hell is merely symbolic.  Now I could be wrong on that.  My understanding of the SDA position on hell, and for that matter my position on Hell is that it is a literal place, and it is literal torment, but it is not eternal torment.  I do not think that this should be a dividing point at least when it comes to whether hell is real and lasts either forever or for a time until the life of satan and sinners is extinguished.  Now as for those who argue hell is symbolic, I think the reality of hell (not regarding whether it is temporary or eternal) is a doctrine we should contend for and a hill we should die on.  That is my thoughts for now.  I May post more later as time permits.

Thanks ChiaPet. I will look forward to hearing more.

Our sovereign God exhibits not merely divine love, but He also dispenses divine justice and wrath.  Jesus mentioned hell four times more often than heaven. Hell is basically a place of perpetual quarantine (separation).  God is so considerate and loving that he finally allows his enemies to have their own way and separate turf.  Truly, heaven would be hell for the ungodly.  However, the ungodly have greatly underestimated the common graces of God throughout redemptive history. Without the common graces of light, warm sunshine, star-studded skies, comfortable homes, good food, awesome scenery, and human fellowship that originate and emanate from God alone, life quickly takes a turn for the very worst.  The darkest darkness of hell becomes horrifying and unimaginable.  Hell’s worst feature is its duration.  Yet in spite of these terrible features, the ungodly in hell will never for even a moment yearn for heaven.  They cannot choose what they do not desire. 

The truthfulness of traditionalism is confirmed by the fact that it coheres well with other biblical teachings.  The ungodly in hell would like for annihilationism to be true.  However, a similar quick-fix was already denied to them when they asked for the rocks and the mountains to fall on them at the sight of His second coming.  The Reformed theologian, Robert Peterson, adds: “When Jesus endured the wrath due sinful humanity, it was as the incarnate God-man; when he bore the penalty of our sins, it was as the sinless substitute, whose own life merited the exact opposite of God’s wrath.  In light of such considerations it is not surprising that Jesus could have borne on the cross what sinful, rebellious human beings can only bear in hell forever.  In other words, because of the infinite dignity of Christ’s person, his sufferings, though finite in duration, were of infinite weight.  As God incarnate, Jesus was capable of suffering in six hours on the cross what we can suffer only over an infinite period of time.”

Dennis Fischer

ChiaPet - 13 March 2008 04:33 PM

I have returned from my lengthy hiatus! I did not read all the responses to this idea, I didnt have enough time.  As far as my thoughts on this topic, I have never understood Adventism as believing hell is merely symbolic.  Now I could be wrong on that.  My understanding of the SDA position on hell, and for that matter my position on Hell is that it is a literal place, and it is literal torment, but it is not eternal torment.  I do not think that this should be a dividing point at least when it comes to whether hell is real and lasts either forever or for a time until the life of satan and sinners is extinguished.  Now as for those who argue hell is symbolic, I think the reality of hell (not regarding whether it is temporary or eternal) is a doctrine we should contend for and a hill we should die on.  That is my thoughts for now.  I May post more later as time permits.

Thanks Chiapet for your observations on this topic. I agree with your understanding of this doctrine. I also agree that it should not be a dividing point among Christians.  I just differ from my good brother Dennis on this topic. We had a stimulating discussion on this topic on another former SDA forum, and it is certainly not my intention to get into this argument again, but with another reformed Bible teacher just recently changing his view, I thought I must speak out again on this topic.

There have been several Reformed Christian writers who have affirmed the view that conscious torment does not go on eternally.  John Stott took a lot of hostile criticism when he deviated from the traditional view as did Phillip Edgecumbe Hughes, and many others. There are many who agree with Stott and Hughes, but because of their prominent positions, they will not admit that the traditional view of eternal torment might be wrong.

Another Reformed Bible teacher who I thought would be the last person to admit that the traditional view is wrong is Harold Camping, the president of Family Radio. For many years he taught the very traditional view that even infants and deformed disabled children who were not elect would suffer in the fires of hell eternally. There are some in the Reformed tradition who tried to get around this problematic teaching by affirming that all infants would automatically be saved--this is the view of Michael Horton, but this view seems untenable. How far would you take this? Would all people who never had the chance to hear the gospel be in the same category as infants?

The Bible is abundantly clear in both the Old Testament and the New Testament that “the soul that sinneth shall die” “the wages of sin is death”, and Jesus warned about the destruction of BOTH BODY AND SOUL IN HELL.  The great Bible translator John Weymouth was amazed that the very simple words of scripture which affirm the destruction of the unsaved could somehow be twisted into saying that death means eternal torment.  Those who believe in eternal torment cannot come up with one text that says that the wicked will be raised in immortal bodies.

Many of our Arminian friends reject the marvelous doctrines of sovereign grace because of a distorted Calvinism which says ‘that God predestined most of the human race who were non-elect to suffer in hell for eternity.  Our Arminian friends get around the problems of eternal torment by saying that no one goes to hell without choosing to go there. Many of them believe that a person can obtain their fire insurance by praying the sinner’s prayer, or raising their hands or going forward at an evangelistic crusade.

But the Reformed view of salvation makes perfect sense in light of a judgment by God that metes out punishment in proportion to the sins committed as the parable of Jesus says which talks about some being “beaten by many stripes, and some by a few stripes. The wrath of God is still real and will be very severe, but it will last a finite time and it will be final. Death and Hades will be cast into the lake of fire, and this is the second death. Sin and suffering will be ultimately removed from the universe forever.  Unsaved infants, disabled children, and many who have died of starvation and died in terrorist attacks, many who have never had a chance to hear the gospel will likely not suffer at all.

The Bible is absolutely certain that only those who hear the gospel can come to faith by God’s sovereign decree. Those who have never had a chance to hear the gospel cannot possibly be saved, but they will suffer the consequences of sin which according to Romans 6 is DEATH, and not eternal life suffering in torment. Malachi 4 is crystal clear that the wicked will be destroyed both “root and branch”, and this terminology is clear that this really means destroyed. 

I am very concerned that too many former Adventists think that every doctrine that SDAs teach is wrong, and they have automatically rejected a doctrine of a just punishment and almost automatically accept the traditional view. I was certainly guilty of doing this, but I had to change my view after studying the Biblical evidence.

How can it be that God would punish infants and children in fiery torment forever?  The traditional doctrine does not square with what we know about the justice of God from the rest of the Bible. I am happy to see that many respected Bible teachers are reconsidering or at least modifying their views on this doctrine.

Soli Deo Gloria

Stan