Originally posted by Rolf Ernst
Clete-- You believe that what Jesus intended did not come to pass as He expected, and as He said. Arminians and OVers believe that generally; especially in regards to what transpired while God was casting off Israel and sending His message to the gentiles.
Taken as a general statement, I would say that this is accurate, but only of OVers. Arminians believe that God foreknows the future exhaustively and so could never expect one thing and get another.
Arminians/OVers believe that God was not sovereign, that men were able to foil His purposes, and as I read your comment, it seemed that you were saying that this was one of those instances.
I do not believe that there has ever been even one single second when God was not sovereign, not one single second.
THAT GOES BEYOND THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. Instead, Rather than an honest interpretation of scripture, it is an odious critique against the Godhead and His Word, positing a failure of God to perform that which He had purposed and prophesied.
How is it not Biblical Rolf?
My interpretation is consistent with the plain reading of the text and is a perfectly acceptable occurrence given the principles that are clearly laid down in Jer. 18. In other words, I let the Bible say what it seems to say and allow the Bible to interpret itself. I don't have a convoluted definition of what it means for God to be sovereign and so I don't have to try to make this (or pretty much any passage) say something other than what a third grader would get from it if they read it.
What is so offensive is that these accusations against God's ability to fulfill His purpose arise only because men prefer to believe that to be the case rather than take to time to understand scripture.
No one said anything about a lack of ability on God's part! God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants to do it. But actions have consequences Rolf, even for God. When God created man kind, He no longer lived in a vacuum. His actions or lack thereof have an impact in us and on the universe we live in as well as the whole of reality. If God were to remove our freewill, which I freely concede that He could do if He wanted, the result would be a complete lack of our ability to actually and genuinely love God or anyone else.
So while your foundational presupposition seems to be the obsolute sovereignty (total control) of God, mine is God's desire to have a loving relationship with His creation. The point is that God cannot have it both ways. Without risking rejection, no one, including God, will ever experience love, ever.
Swannca and Godrulz resolved the seeming contradiction in a God honoring fashion. You, on the other hand, are always looking for some indication that God is no more powerful than His creatures.
I never said any such thing. In fact, I've repeatedly said the reverse. You really need to shut off the emotionalism and simply read my post and take them one step at a time. You are really poor at reading into what I say. I general say what I mean and mean what I say. Your attempting to read my intent is a waste of time.
You even say that He is less powerful when you maintain that the will of creatures of a moment's lifespan MUST TRIUMPH OVER THE WILL OF GOD, or else they don't have free will. Yet it never passes into your skull that you are proposing on the other hand that God can't have free will because His will can't preempt the SACROSANCT (ha, ha) will of fallen creatures. How nauseating!
Again, I've never said that God CANNOT but that He DOES NOT overcome our free will. The thing that God CANNOT do is to remove our freewill, punish or reward our actions and remain just. This not because of a lack in God's ability or power but simply an expression of the meaning of JUSTICE.
If anything it is the Calvinists version of God that is weaker, not of the OV. The Calvinist God cannot even dare to take a risk. If He ever did, He would break or something.
Mt. 16:27,28 is just another text where you naturally fall into your accuse God posture (again, that does not qualify to be called an interpretation of Scripture).
What have I accused God of? Saying what He meant and meaning what He said?
I stated (as did Swannca and Godrulz) a God honoring understanding of those verses. You will continue to posit a failure on the part of Christ's understanding and a consequent failure in the integrity of His Word rather than seriously consider the words of the text.
Again, and hopefully for the last time, I posit no mistake or misunderstand on the part of Christ! On the contrary, Jesus said precisely what He meant and meant just what it seems like He meant. He wasn't wrong; He wasn't mistaken; He wasn't confused. Had Israel not rejected their risen Messiah, things would have proceeded exactly as He had predicted.
Nevertheless, the word of God is settled in heaven. In verse 27, Jesus was speaking of His coming in the glory of the Father with His angels. In verse 28, He was speaking of the beginnings of His kingdom--that it would be taking place so soon that men who were yet alive would see it. Anyone with a modicum of interest in the integrity of scripture is able to discern that a manifestation described as coming in the glory of the Father with His angels is NOT the SAME manifestation spoken of in verse 28: Christ coming in the glory of HIS KINGDOM
As others besides Swannca and Godrulz have
pointed out, the beginning of the manifestation of His kingdom happened shortly afterward on the mount of transfiguration where He appeared in the glory that was due Him. Next, the manifestation of Him as the resurrected prophet, priest, and king in that kingdom; next the day of pentecost and the work of the Holy Spirit, sweeping thousands in that one day into the "kingdom of His dear Son." Throughout the book of Acts, the continuing progress and success of the gospel; finally, what might have been the last evidence of Him coming into His kingdom seen by those who were with Him before they died--the revelation given to John on the isle of Patmos.
THE BIBLE IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE WORDS OF JESUS WERE FULFILLED PRECISELY AS HE SAID. YET YOU RUSH TO POSIT FAILURE AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ON HIS PART AND THE FRUSTRATION OF GOD'S PURPOSES BY MEN FEEBLE AS WORMS WHOSE TIME ON EARTH IS BUT A SHADOW. That is NOT interpreting the bible. It is judging it.
You need to make up your mind. First Jesus was talking about the destruction of Israel by the Romans, then it was the transfiguration, now its some mixture of Paul's gospel of the mystery (the Body of Christ) and that which was spoken of in John's Revelation.
Give me a break. Isn't is so much easier to simply take Jesus at His word and accept that He was referring to the 2nd coming and His establishment of Israel's promised Kingdom, which was the subject of His entire ministry?
It fascinates me how you react so vitriolicly about how I "pass judgment of the words of Christ" and yet I am the one who wants to take what He said at its face value and use the simplest and most obvious interpretation of the text!
Some people, when they come upon texts which seem to be contradictory, do not jump with glee, saying, "see, here is another place where what God said did not happen." Instead, they pray, "Lord, open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things in thy word!"
There is no contradiction that needs explaining. That's just the point! Don't you get it! The only way there would be a contradiction that needs explaining here is if I were a Calvinist! The Open View allows me to read this passage and take it totally at its face value and find no conflict that needs resolved at all! It means exactly what it says as does pretty much the entire Bible.
FINALLY--IF ONLY YOU HAD THE TIME LEFT OVER FROM YOUR CRITICISMS OF SCRIPTURE TO GET A CONCORDANCE AND READ EVERY VERSE WHERE "KINGDOM" IS FOUND IN THE New Testament. Then, you might BEGIN to understand what Jesus was speaking of in the 28th verse---and it WASN'T the judgment He was speaking of in the 27th verse!!!!!!!!! God has "translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son" Col 1:13
I have concordances and I've done my share of word studies and the like and they have their place but it is interesting the effort you have to go through to understand such an incredibly simple issue. This is quite typical of the way most Christians and virtually all Calvinists study the Bible though. Instead of studying countless details in an attempt to get a hold of the bigger picture, I recommend doing the reverse. Once you get an understanding of the big picture, the details become incredibly easy. Doing it the other way around is just a crap shoot; sometimes you'll get it right and others you won't and the more times you get it wrong the more likely you'll continue to get things wrong. This is how we got to the point of having hundreds of Christian sects all over the world and how it was possible for pagan Greek philosophy (Augustinian immutability/predestination) to gain such a foothold in the church in the first place.
Resting in Him,
Clete
P.S. swanca99, good post! I'll repsond as soon as time allows.
