Is Unconditional Love Negated By Conditional Salvation?

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 12 2006, 12:47 PM)

The other problem is that there WASN'T another way to save mankind.

So God isn't omnipotent, because he couldn't have done things differently. Right?

That is not what I said. He could have certainly done things differently. I can name many different things God could have done. The issue is doing things differently AND saving mankind at the same time. Because of the presence of sin, God's justice had to be satisfied.

God could have just destroyed mankind entirely, destroyed this universe and started from scratch. God wanted to save mankind, that was His purpose in redemption. Mankind was legally guilty before God and deserved death. Man willfully rejected God, and God would have been fully within His rights do destroy Adam, Eve and start over. So the question was, how does God legally satisfy His justice while at the same time not destroying mankind. Someone HAS to die. That is where Jesus came in. The Bible says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. God is at peace with the world, because of Jesus. God, in Christ, according to 2Corinthians 5, reconciling to Himself a world that could not reconcile itself. God was not reconciling Himself, to the world. He had done nothing wrong. The world was incapable of reconciling itself to Him, So He took on human flesh and stood where we should have stood, and inflicted upon HIMSELF the punishment we deserved. It is like being sentenced to death and the judge gives himself the death penalty. In this way both requirements were met. He satisfied his justice, and saved mankind at the same time.

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 12 2006, 12:47 PM)

Your problem stems from the assumption that it if giving us freedom would lead to wrong choices then the freedom should have never been granted in the first place.

If this is what you think I'm saying, then I've not been explaining myself well at all; either that, or you've utterly misunderstood me. Whichever way, I'm not saying we shouldn't have had freedom. I am saying - and I'm trying to phrase this as accurately as possible - that if God is omnipotent, he could have given us free will and choice in a world without Sin. If God is omnipotent, then even though that concept seems logically impossible to man, it should pose no barrier to the Almighty. I have never made any judgement about freedom being "bad" or any such foolishness.

Choice to do what? Without "choice" what good is freedom, and how does freedom exist if the ability to do choose is non-existant? If I am driving down a road and I come to fork, and the road on the left has a sign that reads "road closed for repairs" and the road on the right is clear, which do I take? Where is the choice? One is open to me, the other is closed. I do not get to choose. I have to go down the road on the right, whether I like it or not. The whole point behind freedom is the ability to choose. The freedom you are trying to propose is illusory.

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 12 2006, 12:47 PM)

Because God's motivation is love, He has to offer a choice, otherwise He cannot be true to Himself.

You are placing limitations on God's powers every time you say he "has" to do such-and-such. I say again, if he is omnipotent, then the logically/physically impossible is no barrier to his will. If God is God, he could have given us free will in a Sinless world - but this world is full of badness. So, either God has chosen to allow evil into the world (omnipotent) or was unable to create the perfect world despite his love (omnibenevolent). You cannot have both. Please think about this example.

First of all "omnibenevolent" is a made up term, and does not exist. For God to be omnibenevolent, He could not possess the attribute of hate which He possesses. The arguement that He is "all-loving" towards people only, does not wash with the prefix "omni." This is the problem I have cited all along. You folks keep making up fake/false premises to argue from, and it really becomes difficult to have a meaningful dialogue when you keep making things up about the Bible that are not true, and then arguing from those bogus platforms.

Secondly, You need to realize that God "omnipotent" is not the overarching attribute that God possesses. The fact that God has to be true to Himself and His own moral standard does not take away from His power. God is not one-dimensional and does not have to operate in the attribute of omniscience in the manner you prescribe. You say, "if God is omniscient, He will do this or that" as if any other choice would demonstrate that He is NOT all powerful. That is really again, faultly logic on your part. Choosing to save man involves more than just God's power, there is the legal side of it to, and that determines the course of action that will solve the matter of man's sin and God's justice.

QUOTE(shiloh357 @ Jul 12 2006, 12:47 PM)

God did not allow anyone to willfully reject Him without sending those along their path to pull them away from the direction they were going.

You're telling me that sending flawed human vessels to save other flawed human vessels is the best an omnipotent God can do? If the scope of his powers can encompass the creation of the universe, then he's got to have more up his sleeve to deal with Sinful humans than other Sinful humans.

No God sent an unflawed Jesus to save us. He sends us to tell people like you about the salvation we have receieved. Like I said, I see your complaints about God's methods as just an excuse. It would not matter what method God chooses, you would find fault with it. Besides, you don't understand God, His attributes well enough to present a decent arguement against Him. That much has been demonstrated thus far.

[sylvan3]

Shiloh, I am glad that you understand God so well.

Please free to respond to my thread, "The Word of God or the Word of Man".

Thanks.

[EricH]

When we say God's love is unconditional, we mean that it is not caused by any action on our part. God's love is however conditioned by HIs other attributes. God cannot love at the expense of His holiness, or be just at the expense of His love. God holds all of His character attributes in perfection. What some seem to be asking here is that God make HIs love for us the driving attribute at the expense of all others

[Jorge S]

I agree with EricH.

Secondeve,

You cannot judge God for who He is not. And you cannot hyperbolize His Love at the expense of all His Attributes; just as you usually don't do it with any other person. Once you stretch a character trait beyond the limits of a particular person you start misrepresenting who that person really is.

You see God's Love as an ideal and not as a concrete attribute. An ideal is something desirable but not possessed, therefore, in your line of reasoning, God must still learn about love.

God's Love flows richly through Salvation. Try to see it from the opposing argument: Is God's Unconditional Love Negated By Conditional Punishment?

Have a great day.