Question about salvation, repentance, obedience and works

[Kurieuo]

You're forgiven of everything that affects your relationship with God.

You're adding to the text. It doesn't say that we are forgiven of everything that affects our relationship with God. It says that we are forgiven of ALL unrighteousness. ALL, K. You don't have to believe, that, of course, but that's what the text says.

I embrace that God is all-forgiving in Christ, just like God is all-powerful. I'm not adding any more to the text, than someone who says God can do everything and then denies God being able to create a square circle.

Just like it may not be an actual possibility for God to create a world wherein everyone freely chooses Him, it isn't possible for God to actually remove ALL our sin by forcing someone else to forgive us of our sin against them.

God is all-forgiving as much as He can logically be, just like God is all-powerful as much as He can logically be. This is a logical restraint.

Let me try use an example...

• If I steal from my neighbour, and as a consequence my neighbour gets into a fight with my wife who was unaware that I stole. I confess to my wife privately that I stole, and apologise. She says, "don't worry you're forgiven." I respond to her, "thanks, now I don't need to apologise to my neighbour."

What's wrong with this picture. Is my wife forgiving me of my sin against my neighbour, or only the trouble I caused her? Is it my wife's place to forgive my wrong to my neighbour?

But it's not God's place to make an exchange of forgiveness on behalf of another person other than Himself. If I've wronged another person, than God may forgive me for breaking His moral law, but my wrong also stands between me and that person. That's all. It seems so obvious to me that its mute. I"m surprised this is such an issue really.

Not God's place? Really?

Why do you think it is a sin to harm someone else? Because it violates GOD'S law, not anyone else's? Or think about David and Uriah. What did David say after he had the man murdered?

I've gone into this already. God can forgive us for violating His law, but it's up to our neighbour wronged to forgive our sin between us and them.

I am becoming more and more shocked that what I'm saying here isn't plainly and logically obvious.

We may as well just discount from the Lord's prayer: "Forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us". For if ALL unrighteousness has been forgiven, then what can we forgive if Christ has already forgiven it?

Two things:

1. We don't forgive each other of SIN. Sin is breaking God's law. I can't forgive you of breaking God's law. What I can do is not hold it against you--that is the forgiveness between two people.
2. David makes it clear that, strictly speaking, all sin is against God and God alone.

If you see "sin" as a term that can only be applied between us and God, then based on this I concur that it is possible for God to forgive ALL sin.

Seems to jut be a matter of meaning being attributed to "sin" that differs between us.

So then, in my example of "stealing from my neighbour", I may had wronged my neighbour but did not sin against him? Is that what you're saying...?

[Kurieuo]

Beautiful, I'm not so sure... especially if you're right on Hitler. Since all those millions of Jews who were killed, God is making Himself an enemy by withdrawing justice. So there is a moral dilemma God faces, even within His grace. Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?
...
Hitler could have desired to believe and gave the nod to Christ's promise -- but Hitler's heart was hardened against God -- such that the conditions for an authentic "trust" (pisteuo) could not have arisen. And it's not like Hitler would have been scammed. He would have known his own heart, just like those torturers who are said to have thanked God who doesn't exists that they lived to be able to inflict according to their heart's content lots torturous pain upon the Jews. Such torturers may have believed in Jesus intellectually, or passively trusted in a proposition, yet they could not passively trust in Christ anymore than you or I can trust Satan -- for certain conditions had not been met.

It sounds here like you are arguing that Hitler can't be in heaven because he "deserves" justice. If he were in heaven, then He would effectively be not loving "the millions." Moreover, you seemed to go on to argue that Hitler couldn't have trusted Christ, because that would mean that he wouldn't have or couldn't have committed the atrocities he did.

Anyway, the entire context of this idea of God forgiving others came about, it seems to me, because of the Hitler issue. It bothers you that God's grace would extend to someone who has harmed so many people.

Cutting you off here again. If you re-read me, I don't just leave it at Hitler.

It bothers me that God forgives any of us -- that God would extend such grace.

I have a low perspective of humanity. We destroy the world, we kill and hurt each other, we're selfish, humans always play games, try to step other people into the ground... it doesn't surprise me that so many Atheists in the world become so focused on the negativity in the world so as to have a venomous hate for God.

It bothers me that God would forgive us rather than just wipe us all out. He should have gone that one step further with Noah.

But what bothers me doesn't matter, because God didn't. God loves us all including Hitler.

Yet, the moral dilemma God is faced with still stands...

But as you say, it bothers you more for God to forgive bad sinners that for Him to forgive not so bad sinners. That whole notion is absurd to me. Add to the fact that we are talking about the grace of salvation, and not just forgiveness, and it becomes more absurd.

Yes, it bothers me. And I think it'd bother anyone who can place their theology aside for a moment, to get in touch with themselves and think about their feelings on God welcoming Hitler just as much as Teresa.

We understand justice and retribution more easily. That's not absurd at all. We see that Teresa is morally better than Hitler by far, even if compared to God's righteousness Teresa is also a blemish.

Hitler was responsible for the mass killing and torturing of others -- trying to commit genecide. To me, the many millions of souls God also loves should have things made right for the wrongs (I won't use sins) committed against them.

I'd welcome God allowing Hitler to harden himself further, so that in God's love for the millions things could be made right. But if Hitler changed and placed his faith in Christ -- then he's a lucky sob. But, I don't believe that would have been possible given Hitler's condition, and out of God's love for the millions who suffered believe God would have even given Hitler over to himself (Romans 1:24) so that justice would be served rather than grace (Romans 1:27-28 supports the possibility of God giving people over to their wickedness and receiving penalty for their error). That grace nonetheless remained open to Hitler should he change... but he could not.

Suppose, though, that Hitler had a chance to go and apologize to all six million people plus their families plus all the others who suffered for his actions. Suppose he felt true remorse. Would that make God's grace to him even one bit more or less beautiful? It's a silly question, because it would mean that one can be more or less deserving of God's grace--the hate filled Hitler doesn't deserve grace, but the remorseful Hitler does--or, at least, he deserves it more than the hate filled version. What? Grace by definition can't be deserved!

Then Hitler's saved. And I still find God's grace less beautiful than God's wrath.

As you say, who can fathom God's grace? Seriously, think about it. You think about it. Many don't. Many can't. I can't. You need to live an experience to really fathom it. For example...

Say some evil person raped, sexually tortured, and ripped about your little girl piece by piece -- as often happens in a world away from our own comfortable ones in the US or Australia... you then look at that evil person in the eye preaching how beautiful God's grace is that he is forgiven. If this was my little girl, quite frankly, I find it much more beautiful and glorious that God's wrath should be upon such an evil person. I just don't care for them.

Likewise, I know I'm not perfect. Nor is Teresa. So be it to myself and her. Such is more glorious to me, more honourable, that we reap what we sow. Yet, for some reason, God sees things different. And I think I'm simply being more honest, perhaps less deluded than yourself and others who call God's grace beautiful... I won't mix my words, perhaps you're all off in an airy-fairy land of religious language that sounds nice but isn't grasped. You claim to fathom what is apparently unfathomable.

I really can't fathom it, but whether I can or not doesn't take away from the reality of God's grace or that God considers it more beautiful.

Just because I can't fathom its full depth doesn't mean I don't see it as beautiful. And yes, if God forbid something like that did happen to my daughter, I would find it breathtakingly beautiful to find out that person trusted Christ and was in heaven. Why, pray tell, would I want them to suffer an eternal torment in Hell? If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?

Easier to say. But this shows to me how caught up in theology you are, that you can't separate from it to explore your own feelings on the matter.

Your "why" question could I'm sure be readily answered by many others.

Your response that "If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?" shows an entrancement in theology.

I see nothing wrong with being open and honest with how one truly feels, while embracing God sees things different to myself. And yet, I still love God and He loves me.

However, just as God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, in positive terms God takes pleasure in love. God's justice shows fairness and love to the one wronged that they matter to Him. If in their freedom a wicked person turns against God, then while God would much prefer that person didn't turn against Him, God is I believe is free to give them over to their wickedness out of His love for the many who desire justice -- without this affecting God's benevolence.

[Kurieuo]

You seem really caught up on the vengeance thing. Maybe I'm wrong, but that it show it sounds. Accuse me of being in a fairy land if you like. I'm just looking at the world the way the Bible says God does.

I'm not vigilante out for revenge, but I still desire justice.

"Vengence is mine" and "I will repay" says the Lord. And so since God is the one dishing it out, it is only justice that will be metted out if one doesn't abound in His grace.

How does Romans 12:19 fit in with your free grace?

[RickD]

I remember a sermon that jlay posted a couple of days ago. I can't find it, or I would have linked it here. In the sermon, the speaker talked about being in a room with Christians wearing masks, and they were putting on a "happy face". These Christians were asked how they were doing, and they pretended to be fine. Well Jac, this post you wrote, seems like something one of those masked believers would have said:

jac wrote:
Just because I can't fathom its full depth doesn't mean I don't see it as beautiful. And yes, if God forbid something like that did happen to my daughter, I would find it breathtakingly beautiful to find out that person trusted Christ and was in heaven. Why, pray tell, would I want them to suffer an eternal torment in Hell? If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?

I can't judge your intentions when you wrote it, but it just seems " not genuine". It just doesn't seem like anything someone would really feel after their daughter was molested and killed.
I just think that anyone who doesn't go through a period of extreme anger after something like that, is not dealing in reality. Not to say that eventually, one might feel the way you described.

[Jac3510]

If you see "sin" as a term that can only be applied between us and God, then based on this I concur that it is possible for God to forgive ALL sin.

Seems to jut be a matter of meaning being attributed to "sin" that differs between us.

So then, in my example of "stealing from my neighbour", I may had wronged my neighbour but did not sin against him? Is that what you're saying...?

You sinned against him, but that means that you broke God's law concerning how we are to treat others. Your neighbor is wounded and offended and you and he need to take steps to reconcile your relationship. You are not guilty before him, however, in the sense of him being your judge. You are guilty before God and need to be forgiven by Him for your sin.

Beyond that nuance, I'm much more comfortable with the way you have phrased it here.

Yes, it bothers me. And I think it'd bother anyone who can place their theology aside for a moment, to get in touch with themselves and think about their feelings on God welcoming Hitler just as much as Teresa.

We understand justice and retribution more easily. That's not absurd at all. We see that Teresa is morally better than Hitler by far, even if compared to God's righteousness Teresa is also a blemish.

Hitler was responsible for the mass killing and torturing of others -- trying to commit genecide. To me, the many millions of souls God also loves should have things made right for the wrongs (I won't use sins) committed against them.

I'd welcome God allowing Hitler to harden himself further, so that in God's love for the millions things could be made right. But if Hitler changed and placed his faith in Christ -- then he's a lucky sob. But, I don't believe that would have been possible given Hitler's condition, and out of God's love for the millions who suffered believe God would have even given Hitler over to himself (Romans 1:24) so that justice would be served rather than grace (Romans 1:27-28 supports the possibility of God giving people over to their wickedness and receiving penalty for their error). That grace nonetheless remained open to Hitler should he change... but he could not.
...
Easier to say. But this shows to me how caught up in theology you are, that you can't separate from it to explore your own feelings on the matter.

Your "why" question could I'm sure be readily answered by many others.

Your response that "If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?" shows an entrancement in theology.

I see nothing wrong with being open and honest with how one truly feels, while embracing God sees things different to myself. And yet, I still love God and He loves me.

However, just as God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, in positive terms God takes pleasure in love. God's justice shows fairness and love to the one wronged that they matter to Him. If in their freedom a wicked person turns against God, then while God would much prefer that person didn't turn against Him, God is I believe is free to give them over to their wickedness out of His love for the many who desire justice -- without this affecting God's benevolence.

I know the feelings you are reporting are common. They are part of our nature. But I think they are just wrong. But let me qualify that. Feelings, in and of themselves, are never wrong. They just are what they are. What is wrong is what we do with them. So feeling romantic attraction to a woman not my wife is not sinful. Dwelling on that and entertaining it most certainly is.

So you feel rage and anger and resentment at injustice. Fine. Nothing wrong with that. We've both read Lewis and can show how that feeling attests to the reality of the moral law and ultimately to a righteous God's existence. The problem, however, is that the righteous God we have come to believe in Has already told us that He has taken care of it. To hold on to that feeling is tantamount to disbelief on our part, which is the root of all sin. Let me illustrate. Two kids are playing a game and one cheats. Upon hearing the commotion, an adult walks in and hears both sides of the argument. He sees exactly what happens, and informs the two: "Fine. I know what happened. John, what you did was wrong. We will talk about it when we get home. Billy, you don't worry about it. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. I'll handle it from here. Now, you two boys go back to playing, and no more cheating."

At this point, if Billy proceeds to seek further justice against John, then he is either declaring that the parent's justice is insufficient and that John needs more punishment, or he is declaring that he does not believe that John will be punished at all (or both). Either way, the problem here is that Billy doesn't believe that the parent will do what he said.

When we hold on to our anger against someone else, that is exactly what we are doing to God. In the process, we are questioning His very character, which is sin.

Therefore, when someone wrongs us, the proper response is to recognize it for what it is: a sin against God. Second, we need to take our pride and egos out of the situation and ask what is the prudent steps to take. Can the relationship continue? If so, can it continue as it did before? You should then act accordingly, but you are theologically required to recognize that God will take care of it. For you to insist on justice is to play God, which is nothing less than idolatry.

Now, you can accuse me of not being able to place my theology aside. That's nothing more than a personal attack, whether intentional or not. What I am describing is the CORRECT way to respond. And while I don't always respond that way, I do rather often, and yes, even when I am rather severely wronged. I don't know if you know this, but part of my education as a hospital chaplain is to go through a process called Clinical Pastoral Education, in which we spend a LOT of time in self-reflection (which, in turn, is shared with our supervisor, who helps us dig deeper, and the cycle continues). These are just the sort of things we talk about on a regular basis. One of the best little books I ever read on this subject is called Why Don't We Listen Better written by a counselor named James C. Petersen. He points out many of the same things I am here (only on more of a secular level).

This is part of the whole radical nature of Christianity we tend not to like so we just ignore. Part of receiving grace means that I am obligated to give grace. Part of receiving love means that I am obligated to love. Part of receiving forgiveness means that I am obligated to forgive. We don't have the right to appeal to base feelings (which are heavily influenced by the Fall) to justify our sinful responses to people. We don't have the right to judge. What we must do is be kind and gracious--never forget the meaning of grace, K. It is UNMERITED favor. If the only people you show "grace" to are people who are relatively good, then you've shown absolutely no grace at all. Grace is only grace when it is given to those who do NOT deserve it. To withhold grace from them is simply to withhold grace, and to withhold grace from your fellow man while receiving it from God is the height of hypocrisy.

You seem really caught up on the vengeance thing. Maybe I'm wrong, but that it show it sounds. Accuse me of being in a fairy land if you like. I'm just looking at the world the way the Bible says God does.

I'm not vigilante out for revenge, but I still desire justice.

"Vengence is mine" and "I will repay" says the Lord. And so since God is the one dishing it out, it is only justice that will be metted out if one doesn't abound in His grace.

How does Romans 12.19 fit in with your free grace?

It's funny you ask that. Did you read the context before asking? Look at what it says:

• Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

You talk about how you would be happy for Hitler to burn (essentially), how you would find it hard to extend an evil person grace. And yet, look at what this passage is telling us to do--extend them grace! This isn't talking about fellow Christians who messed up. This is talking about people who are out to hurt you--the Hitler's of the world. We are to LOVE them. Look at that . . . we are to BLESS them. How can you bless someone whom you are cursing in your heart? God has a thing or two to say about acting one way while your heart secretly is in another place, you know . . .

And you know what? God will repay. And while you may find comfort in that, it terrifies me. Because I know that if God will repay Hitler, how much MORE will He repay ME? I'm reminded here of Amos 5:18. The Jews were hoping for the Day of the Lord so that God would take His vengeance on the nations, and Amos says, "Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord! Why would you have the day of the Lord? It is darkness, and not light, as if a man fled from a lion, and a bear met him, or went into the house and leaned his hand against the wall, and a serpent bit him. Is not the day of the Lord darkness, and not light, and gloom with no brightness in it?" In short, they didn't know what they were asking for! Look, I pray Jesus comes back to save me from this earth soon, but I fear the Judgment Seat of Christ. I only have confidence to stand before Him because I know that, no matter how bad I am (and I know that I am far worse than I could possibly admit to myself), He has promised me salvation. But the actual judgment? When I really see my sin for what it is?

No, I pray that God will be merciful. And if He will not be merciful to the most evil men of the world, why, pray tell, would He be merciful to me? God shows no partiality, remember? I cannot ask God to be merciful to me and not merciful to others. Jesus made the same point when He said, "the way you judge others will be the way you are judged yourself" (Matt 7:2).

So, yes, our sins are COMPLETELY atoned for. We are forgiven in Christ, and we can seek daily forgiveness for the sin that we insist on living in. God will chastise His children, both in this life and the next. But it is precisely for that reason, that GOD will chastise, that I have absolutely no right to chastise, no right to hold anyone's sin against them, and no right to seek out their chastisement. Instead, I must rejoice when they are given grace.

And you know what? I do rejoice. Call me a liar if you want. I'm telling you that it is true. I am so very deeply aware of my own sin that I can't help but break down in tears from time to time at the grace of God towards me. And while you may think that you are better than people like Hitler, I don't. I cannot honestly say that if I were in his shoes, with his raising, with his background, with his power, that I would not have done the same thing. There but by the grace of God go I! K, I am NO better than the worst of sinners. I truly believe that, and when my flesh comes up and tells me I am, that someone deserves punishment more than me, that I deserve more grace, that I have a right to hate or be angry at someone, then my job is to say, "Get thee behind me, Satan," because that is all that is. And to give into that is to do nothing less than to give into the temptation to sin.

I remember a sermon that jlay posted a couple of days ago. I can't find it, or I would have linked it here. In the sermon, the speaker talked about being in a room with Christians wearing masks, and they were putting on a "happy face". These Christians were asked how they were doing, and they pretended to be fine. Well Jac, this post you wrote, seems like something one of those masked believers would have said:

jac wrote:
Just because I can't fathom its full depth doesn't mean I don't see it as beautiful. And yes, if God forbid something like that did happen to my daughter, I would find it breathtakingly beautiful to find out that person trusted Christ and was in heaven. Why, pray tell, would I want them to suffer an eternal torment in Hell? If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?

I can't judge your intentions when you wrote it, but it just seems " not genuine". It just doesn't seem like anything someone would really feel after their daughter was molested and killed.
I just think that anyone who doesn't go through a period of extreme anger after something like that, is not dealing in reality. Not to say that eventually, one might feel the way you described.

Actually, Rick, that was me who posted that sermon. And what I wrote is not a mask. It's absolutely true. It's the words of someone who has come to realize in some small way how terrible I really am. If I could just find people who were so gracious . . . I could list my sins openly, and hear someone call out, "That's all you got? I'll hear your sin and raise you this one!" And in that room, when a new person entered and started listing their sins, then I could say, "That's all you got? Really? I'll hear your sin, and I'll raise you this!"

My next door neighbor is in prison right now. Over the Christmas weekend, he shot and killed his ex-girlfriend's new boyfriend. You know what? I spent good time talking to him. He was a really nice guy. I never knew he had that in him. I bet he didn't either. And who is to say that I don't? Jesus said to hate someone was to commit murder, so while I thank God deeply that I'm not in prison, how can I look at myself as better by one bit than that young man? I can't, and it wouldn't matter that the victim wasn't my son or brother or best friend. The victim was still a human being. Both men fell into a serious tragedy. Who am I to judge? No one. No one at all. I'm NOT saying that I would not be inconsolably distraught if the victim was one of my kids. But there is a huge difference in inconsolable pain and hatred for the perpetrator. I can grieve my loss without holding it against the person who caused the loss. I may not be able to have fellowship with them. But that doesn't mean I have to hold it against them, and it doesn't mean that I should be anything less than over the moon thrilled were I to find that person had come to Christ and would spend eternity in heaven.

So, like I said to K . . . feel free to tell yourself that I'm just hiding behind a theology. The truth is that I can't be more open and honest with you. This is real, and this is the way it really is.

[Kurieuo]

If you see "sin" as a term that can only be applied between us and God, then based on this I concur that it is possible for God to forgive ALL sin.

Seems to jut be a matter of meaning being attributed to "sin" that differs between us.

So then, in my example of "stealing from my neighbour", I may had wronged my neighbour but did not sin against him? Is that what you're saying...?

You sinned against him, but that means that you broke God's law concerning how we are to treat others. Your neighbor is wounded and offended and you and he need to take steps to reconcile your relationship. You are not guilty before him, however, in the sense of him being your judge. You are guilty before God and need to be forgiven by Him for your sin.

Beyond that nuance, I'm much more comfortable with the way you have phrased it here.

Hmm. This seems to have just come around in a full circle.

If I sinned against him (my neighbour), then "sin" isn't a term that is only applied between us and God. Nonetheless, I don't want to dwell on it.

Let me know if the following sounds fine to you:

If I steal from my neighbour, I have wronged my neighbour AND sinned against God. God forgives our sin, but only our neighbour can forgive our wrong against him.

Does that sit better at all?

[Jac3510]

Yes, K, I'm comfortable with that. The sin is an issue between you and God. You cannot sin against your neighbor, since his law has no relevance to you. The harm you caused is an issue between you and your neighbor. You cannot harm God, since He is perfect and can nothing taken from Him.

[Kurieuo]

Yes, K, I'm comfortable with that. The sin is an issue between you and God. You cannot sin against your neighbor, since his law has no relevance to you. The harm you caused is an issue between you and your neighbor. You cannot harm God, since He is perfect and can nothing taken from Him.

Ok, great. It'll help as I re-read our exchanges. But based on your understanding, we'd be pretty much aligned regarding God forgiving all sin ("sin" being breaking God's law and as such something that can only exist between us and God). Just I was more relaxed with my use of the term "sin" previously, equivocating it simply for a "wrong".

[RickD]

Jac wrote:
Actually, Rick, that was me who posted that sermon. And what I wrote is not a mask. It's absolutely true. It's the words of someone who has come to realize in some small way how terrible I really am.

Jac, I'm glad you finally came to realize what we've known for quite a while now.

jac wrote:
I'm NOT saying that I would not be inconsolably distraught if the victim was one of my kids. But there is a huge difference in inconsolable pain and hatred for the perpetrator.

That's a more normal reaction, IMO. Some people just feel a greater amount of anger than others. Some people deal with their loss with less anger, and more depression. All I'm saying is that I think anger is completely normal at a time like that. And being thankful to God that the child killer/molester could be in heaven, is not normal after a tragedy like that. But, like I originally said, it's probably normal for some people to feel that way EVENTUALLY.

jac wrote:
So, like I said to K . . . feel free to tell yourself that I'm just hiding behind a theology. The truth is that I can't be more open and honest with you. This is real, and this is the way it really is.

You're reading too much into what I said. I'm not claiming you're hiding Jac. I only said, by the way you wrote it, that it "seems" like something from the sermon. I'm not saying you meant it that way though. Just that it could be perceived that way. In fact, I wasn't the only one to read it that way. Someone else posted a response to that same paragraph I responded to. Their response was a more emotional response to your post. I think the poster must've realized that, because he erased his post shortly after.

So, PERCEPTION was my only point. Nothing more.

[jlay]

Jac said:
Just because I can't fathom its full depth doesn't mean I don't see it as beautiful. And yes, if God forbid something like that did happen to my daughter, I would find it breathtakingly beautiful to find out that person trusted Christ and was in heaven. Why, pray tell, would I want them to suffer an eternal torment in Hell? If God takes no pleasure in their death, then why should I?

I'm sure we'll all see it differently the other side of heaven. But I would make no claims to what I might feel or do should something like this happen. Obviously Christ had this mind, as He prayed for the forgiveness of those who were even nailing him to the cross. Of course it was qualified with, "they know NOT what they do."

Hate what is evil, hold on to what is good. I'm curiuos how do see Bonhoeffer's efforts against Hitler, including a plot of assasination?

Here is another good question. The Psalms are filled with prayers against people. How are we to take those prayers? Often David prayed curses on his enemies. He prayed for their destruction, etc. I'm not saying he was right, but obviously their inclusion in the text gives us a reason to ask why. We are told to pray for our enemies, but does this exclude such a prayer?

Yes, K, I'm comfortable with that. The sin is an issue between you and God. You cannot sin against your neighbor, since his law has no relevance to you. The harm you caused is an issue between you and your neighbor. You cannot harm God, since He is perfect and can nothing taken from Him.

When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. (1 Cor. 8:12)
I agree that all sin is against God, but why did he state this as such?

[Jac3510]

I'm sure we'll all see it differently the other side of heaven. But I would make no claims to what I might feel or do should something like this happen. Obviously Christ had this mind, as He prayed for the forgiveness of those who were even nailing him to the cross. Of course it was qualified with, "they know NOT what they do."

Hate what is evil, hold on to what is good. I'm curiuos how do see Bonhoeffer's efforts against Hitler, including a plot of assasination?

Here is another good question. The Psalms are filled with prayers against people. How are we to take those prayers? Often David prayed curses on his enemies. He prayed for their destruction, etc. I'm not saying he was right, but obviously their inclusion in the text gives us a reason to ask why. We are told to pray for our enemies, but does this exclude such a prayer?

As to the feeling, I want to emphasize what I said before: no feelings are sinful in and of themselves. The question is what we do with them. It is normal to want justice. It i wrong to want God to deny grace to someone because they hurt you. It is wrong to take pleasure when they do suffer for what they have done to you.

As to the imprecatory psalms, it's important to distinguish between vindictiveness and vindication. David wasn't asking God to destroy his (David's) enemies just to enjoy the soothing of his anger, as if He were saying, "hahahaha gods gunna git u now!!1!1" David was asking God to vindicate, both himself and Himself. David was suffering because of his stand for Yahweh, and God needed to protect his honor in doing so. Likewise, God needed to protect His own honor. God certainly has atoned for all sin, but that does not change the fact that He still wants people to treat each other well. He still is concerned for His own Name. David is basically saying, "God, rise up and defend Yourself by defending your servant!" Would the evil-doer repent and turn to Yahweh, there would be no such need for vindication.

When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. (1 Cor. 8:12)
I agree that all sin is against God, but why did he state this as such?

Yeah, I thought about how I worded that when I first said it. We can say that we sin against our neighbor, sure. The Bible uses that language itself. But my point, is that when we sin against our brother, the SIN is breaking God's law (cf. 1 John 3:4). I love using my daughter to illustrate, because I know her really well, have lots of stories, and because I can relate to her on so many levels. So let's continue that trend. She has a little friend who she plays with all the time. But being the age she is, she sometimes gets frustrated and will bully her friend (Elly is about a year older and much taller). When she does that, she gets in a lot of trouble by me. I'm the one who disciplines her, and that because she broke MY rule (don't be ugly to others!). Obviously, her friend doesn't like it, and I make her apologize to help patch the relationship up. But the point is that Elly isn't breaking Meria's law. She is breaking Daddy's law.She isn't being disciplined because she broke Meria's law. She's being disciplined because she broke Daddy's law.

That's the way I see the moral law being broken. We sin against others when we break God's moral law. He disciplines us for breaking that law. To put in short words what has already been too long, In sinning against my brother I am breaking God's law, and therefore He is the one who has to forgive me for the sin.

That's my view, anyway. :p

[jlay]

It i wrong to want God to deny grace to someone because they hurt you. It is wrong to take pleasure when they do suffer for what they have done to you.

I think Jonah illustrates this point. Jonah did not want to go because he knew that if Nineveh repented, that God would show mercy. God pointed out that Jonah's attitude (based on his feelings) was wrong.

As to the imprecatory psalms, it's important to distinguish between vindictiveness and vindication. David wasn't asking God to destroy his (David's) enemies just to enjoy the soothing of his anger, as if He were saying, "hahahaha gods gunna git u now!!1!1" David was asking God to vindicate, both himself and Himself. David was suffering because of his stand for Yahweh, and God needed to protect his honor in doing so. Likewise, God needed to protect His own honor. God certainly has atoned for all sin, but that does not change the fact that He still wants people to treat each other well. He still is concerned for His own Name. David is basically saying, "God, rise up and defend Yourself by defending your servant!" Would the evil-doer repent and turn to Yahweh, there would be no such need for vindication.

Very true. I just often wonder why we never hear such prayer today?

Here in town, we had one of the most tragic crimes I've ever seen. It made national news. Couple kidnapped, tortured, raped and killed by four assailents over a period of two or three days. .
The father of one of the victims has to be one of the most hate filled men I've ever seen. On one hand, as the Father of a 12 year old girl, I empathize with this man's pain and loss. However, I cannot sympathize,having never experienced such a tragedy. As a believer I see a man who is absolutely eat up with hate. Just to be honest, I don't like the guy. The reason, I think, is due to what you are speaking to. He himself has a murderous spirit, as there is little doubt this Father would exact the same or worse on these criminals, if he could get his hands on them. It is a very confusing dynamic. At the same time, I myself want to see justice served regarding these perpetrators. Not in a hand rubbing, sh%& eating grin kind of way. We know that eternally, justice is served. But where does it fit temporally? We punish criminals.
Even consider that people who perhaps lived wreckless lives can be eternally forgiven. However, their actions may still have temporal consequences. Damage to their own bodies and minds, or other people. A person who contracts AIDS from wreckless behavior, has been forgiven of their actions, but the consequences in the here and now, don't magically disappear.
It is very true that our unforgiveness inhibits our relationship with God. We stand in His grace every day, while we deserve the fires of Hell. We do have so much to learn.

[Kurieuo]

Kureiuo wrote:
Does He love Hitler inspite of the millions who deserve justice, or does God love the millions and give justice its due?

K, when I read this, I couldn't help but think of Christ. I believe justice was given its due, when Christ completely paid the price that justice demands. There was justice. The punishment that justice demands was paid. And it was paid in full.

on account of our sin against God... not others.

But K, our sin against others IS a sin against God.

So to revisit this in light of more sensitive definitions of "sin"...

The punishment for ALL wrong against God was paid in full such that God's righteous requirements were met in Christ.

There are different ways to look at how God's wrath was met in Christ, and I don't claim any one way is entirely correct, or to know all nuances. This is a field in Christian theology that is constantly producing new perspectives and new insights.

However, for me, it seems correct to say God's wrath demands justice. In Christ, the sacrifice of the perfect Lamb, God's wrath was met with a perfect atonement on behalf of humanity. This atonement was found in Christ via His association with humanity, His being the perfect priest and making the perfect sacrifice on our behalf. Such that we no longer need to bear the brunt of God's wrath.

God's wrath is rather replaced with forgiveness such that we are saved by God's grace through faith in Christ. This is all by God's grace -- a free gift -- nothing we deserved and nothing we do is deserving of it other than it's something God desired -- a loving relationship with humanity.

Now with that out of the way... let me rehash my own perspective on Hitler and God.

We come to Hitler versus the many millions of deaths and tortures that he was ultimately responsible for. The deaths of such no doubt cry out for justice -- for the wrongs committed against them. If Hitler sincerely came to Christ, then justice is replaced with forgiveness. Yet, it is only in Christ. Hitler made his own decisions that lead him away from God.

All I am saying, is that there is nothing wrong with God using Hitler's own freely made decision, and just handing him over to his own wickedness rather than pursuing him. We see evidence of this with Pharaoh with God hardening his heart, such that God's glory would be seen with Israel. We see this in Romans 1 of God handing people over to their own wickedness to do what is not right and suffer the consequences on their actions.

So then, and this is my personal judgement, I see that Hitler deserves justice, as do we all for our own sins. Yet, the cure -- is found in Christ. So without the cure, then Hitler stands on his own feet before God's judgement and impending wrath. And in this, justice is served on behalf of the millions God also loves.

Question. Why should God ignore the cries of the millions of people he loves by continuing to draw Hitler to Christ (if it was even possible for God to do so), rather than simply allowing Hitler to suffer what's due?

The question might be pushed back as Jac did that we all deserve God's wrath. Yes, but there are no cries I'm aware of against my name for my part in the killing hundreds and thousands and millions of people -- babies, young girls and boys who had vivisection performed on them -- being cut alive and sown to one another -- women and men gassed as Hitler pushed genecide upon the Jewish people and a great deal of other atrocities... I have none of this on my record.

God can ignore the cries that His own Righteousness demands, because God is big enough. But should God also ignore the cries of the many whom He also loves? God may have forgiven Hitler for his sins, but Hitler is still to face justice unless in Christ. Given this God has two options:

a) Give Hitler over to himself, to have justice dished out via God's wrath -- which would validate, affirm and honor the lives of the millions he wronged whom God also loved.

OR...

b) Continue trying to draw Hitler to Christ, and have justice avoided and replaced with forgiveness -- which would mean the cries of millions would also be ignored.

I'm sorry, but I can't help but feel God would opt for a) in giving Hitler over to himself so that he'd face judgement. Given the gravity of Hitler's wrongs against others who'd accuse him at God's judgment, I can't help but feel that God would in his omniscience listen to such cries ahead of time. And listening to these cries, God gives Hitler over to himself to suffer God's wrath for all he reaped on Earth.

If this makes me vengeful and spiteful you're entitled to see me that way, but I rather see it as simply desiring fairness and justice out of respect to his victims.

Jac, you recently also countered with -- if we were born when Hitler was, and experienced the that exact same things in life, etc then we would have made the same decisions. I disagree. This is far from obvious and to believe this makes who we are all fatalistic. If 1000 different people were placed in Hitler's exact same circumstances and experiences, since I believe God also created "free" beings -- I believe you'd like have 1000 different responses and lives. Sure we're influenced by our biology and environment to a large degree, but 100%?? No, I don't believe so and I don't know why any Christian would opt to believe this.

To believe that our choices and actions, even thoughts, are simply determined products of our make-up, environment and experiences is Determinism. And I don't believe in Determinism because such means I am forced to disregard what I intuitively believe is true -- namely that "I" truly do exist, that "I" really do have moral choices in life, that concepts of justice and fairness really are true.

To say that we are merely determined beings, is akin to saying we are simply a bunch of chemicals playing out according to physical laws -- and this suffers all the same philosophical problems that Naturalists have -- which mind you very strongly swing me towards God's existence.

[Jac3510]

OK, K, I want to start by highlighting this:

The punishment for ALL wrong against God was paid in full such that God's righteous requirements were met in Christ.

Keep that in mind, because it's going to be important.

We come to Hitler versus the many millions of deaths and tortures that he was ultimately responsible for. The deaths of such no doubt cry out for justice -- for the wrongs committed against them. If Hitler sincerely came to Christ, then justice is replaced with forgiveness. Yet, it is only in Christ. Hitler made his own decisions that lead him away from God.

Of course they cry out for justice. And, K, that justice was completely fulfilled in Christ's work on the Cross. It wouldn't matter if Hitler did or did not come to Him for forgiveness. God's wrath against his sin has already been satisfied. You're just back to offering the traditional view of unlimited (not universal) atonement--the idea that the atonement is sufficient for all be efficient only for those who believe. Note your own words I started with. ALL wrongs against God have been paid in full by Christ. You cant say that and turn around and say, "but only if you trust Him for it," because then they have not ALL been paid. The only ones that have been paid on that view is the ones of those who believe. So you either need to be consistent with your original wording it to be consistent with what you later state, something like, "The punishment for ALL wrong against God [committed by those who believe in Christ] was paid in full such that God's righteous requirements were met in Christ."

All I am saying, is that there is nothing wrong with God using Hitler's own freely made decision, and just handing him over to his own wickedness rather than pursuing him. We see evidence of this with Pharaoh with God hardening his heart, such that God's glory would be seen with Israel. We see this in Romans 1 of God handing people over to their own wickedness to do what is not right and suffer the consequences on their actions.

And this goes back to my original question to you that you objected to. Why should the unforgiveness of some keep me out of heaven? Of course God can hand over people to their own sin, but do you think He does so at the behest of some of His children? Think about what you are saying. God WANTS to save me, but because I've done some really bad things, God doesn't want to offend these other people, so He chooses not to. Really? So, AGAIN, other people's unforgiveness is keeping me out of heaven?

K, no offense, but that is absurd. It makes a mockery of the entire notion of grace. God didn't hand Pharaoh over to his own wicked heart to satisfy the Jews' desire for justice. He did it because Pharaoh had made the choice to reject Him already (Exod 5:2), and so God was using Pharaoh's own sin to glorify Himself as a testimony to His children of His faithfulness to them. I have absolutely no doubt that God would have been thrilled (as would the Israelites, by the way) if Pharaoh had just let the Jews go as God commanded. But he didn't, so God--being sovereign--chose to use Pharaoh in a "dishonorable" way to bring Himself honor. There was no thirst for justice here! What there was, as Jlay and I talked about with reference to the imprecatory psalms, was a desire a desire for vindication.

And again, remember your own words. If Christ truly paid the price for ALL sin, then God's wrath has been satisfied even in the case of Pharaoh. So, in calling for God's wrath in terms of justice here, you are denying your own claim that Christ paid the price for ALL sin.

Question. Why should God ignore the cries of the millions of people he loves by continuing to draw Hitler to Christ (if it was even possible for God to do so), rather than simply allowing Hitler to suffer what's due?

Because He loves Hitler, too.

Moreover, I defy your claim that the millions who died under Hitler are making such cries. If they were believers, then they now have glorified bodies and see God's grace for what it is. If they are crying for anything, it is for God to call Him all the more. You believe that in this life we are called to pray for the lost, right? Our hearts are to break for the lost, right? Are you really suggesting that we are only to pray for and have broken hearts for the relatively good lost? That there is a point at which we shouldn't bother praying for them because they are too bad? That's absurd. Remember again the words of Jesus: he who is forgiven much loves much. He who is forgiven little loves little.

And this takes me back yet again to the question you objected to. Why should the offense of "millions" of God's children keep Hitler out of heaven? Would it matter if it were the offense of one or the offense of a million? Where is the cut off? Can God ignore the offense of one, but at the 237,487th He says, "Okay, that's it! I can ignore the cries of 237,486, but 237,287 . . . that just too much. [soupnazi]NO SALVATION FOR YOU![/soupnazi]" No, if we're going to be consistent, then we need to say that the offense of one means that God should turn us over to our own sin and stop drawing us.

You seem to anticipate that when you say:

The question might be pushed back as Jac did that we all deserve God's wrath. Yes, but there are no cries I'm aware of against my name for my part in the killing hundreds and thousands and millions of people -- babies, young girls and boys who had vivisection performed on them -- being cut alive and sown to one another -- women and men gassed as Hitler pushed genecide upon the Jewish people and a great deal of other atrocities... I have none of this on my record.

So you are right, that is exactly how I push back on the question. And do you really think that there are no such cries against you? Again, I hear Luke 18:11. Have you ever been angry with someone? Jesus says you've murdered them. Have you ever lied against someone? Besmirched their reputation? Let's not forget Jas 4:17. Have you ever had the opportunity to help someone, knew you should, and just didn't for your own reasons? Have you ever had a worldly good that you refused to give to another person in need (1 John 4:17)? Can you really stand here and say that no one can make a claim of your injustice against them?

You may say, "But what I did wasn't as bad as what Hitler did!" But that gets to another fundamental problem I have here. Not only do I believe the theology you are promoting here make light of the Cross (insofar as it denies that God's work was REALLY finished here, that Jesus didn't really pay the price for ALL sin), I think it makes light of sin. You've created "levels" of sin here. Sure, you are a sinner, but you aren't as bad as that guy over there! All sin deserves Hell in the abstract, but some sin REALLY deserves Hell. It's rather convenient, of course, that your sins wouldn't fit in that latter category. It's a means of self-justification. It refuses to recognize that to break ONE law makes you a lawbreaker. One sin makes you a sinner, and you along with the rest of us, from me to Mother Teresa to Hitler. We're all in this sinking boat together. It's also funny that we always compare ourselves to "really bad" sinners . . . see, we don't REALLY deserve Hell as much as they do . . . but we never bother comparing ourselves to REALLY good sinners. I mean, if Mother Teresa only deserved Hell a little bit, but not enough for God not to call her to Himself, then what about you? Are you anywhere near as holy as that woman? Why should the cut off line for where you are "bad enough" be after you? I imagine that, compared to her, you're a pretty bad dude, dude. I know I am.

No, K the Bible is clear on this. For all sin and fall short of the glory of God. You don't to get to put yourself in some special category because you don't sin as badly as someone else. You, my friend, are a very evil, wicked, horribly bad person. What you DESERVE is nothing less than an eternity in Hell being tormented by the very presence of God. But you know what? As bad as you are, God still loves you. You don't see how bad you are, but you also don't see how much He loves you. And if that is true of you, it is true of EVERYONE.

God can ignore the cries that His own Righteousness demands, because God is big enough. But should God also ignore the cries of the many whom He also loves? God may have forgiven Hitler for his sins, but Hitler is still to face justice unless in Christ. Given this God has two options:

a) Give Hitler over to himself, to have justice dished out via God's wrath -- which would validate, affirm and honor the lives of the millions he wronged whom God also loved.

OR...

b) Continue trying to draw Hitler to Christ, and have justice avoided and replaced with forgiveness -- which would mean the cries of millions would also be ignored.

I'm sorry, but I can't help but feel God would opt for a) in giving Hitler over to himself so that he'd face judgement. Given the gravity of Hitler's wrongs against others who'd accuse him at God's judgment, I can't help but feel that God would in his omniscience listen to such cries ahead of time. And listening to these cries, God gives Hitler over to himself to suffer God's wrath for all he reaped on Earth.

I'm sorry, too, because in opting for (a) you are devaluing Jesus' work on the Cross. Remember your own words I started with. You either believe that or you don't. Those who love God don't cry for the blood of others. They cry for God to save others. Remember, K -- BLESS those who persecute you. When you pray for their blood, you are sinning. You're doing worse than murdering them. You're praying for their eternal death. I don't know that Hitler ever even did such a wicked thing.

And let me emphasize here, because this sounds like it is getting really personal, I'm not attacking you and I don't think poorly of you. Hear my words in their context. We are ALL that bad, K. EVEN ME. Go and listen to the sermon I linked Rick to. I do believe that if you pray for God to turn His back on someone like Hitler, you are committing a very deep sin. Jlay pointed out a GREAT example of that in the book of Jonah. Indeed, that's the ENTIRE point of that book! But as wicked as that sin is, K, I've done things just as bad. I'm not judging you one iota. You and I, we're in the same boat. We're both horrible, wicked sinners who are saved by the grace of a loving God. So what right would I or do I have to judge you? I mean, Hey Kettle! You're black!

And I'll continue to beat the dead horse with reference to your (b) above that God's justice is NOT undermined by calling Hitler to Himself. His justice was completely fulfilled at the Cross.

If this makes me vengeful and spiteful you're entitled to see me that way, but I rather see it as simply desiring fairness and justice out of respect to his victims.

It does make you vengeful and spiteful. I pray that you'll read the words of Matt 7:2 and really ponder over them. God isn't out for fairness. If He were, we would ALL be in Hell. God is out for GRACE--UNDESERVED favor. K, God justifies the UNGODLY (Rom 4:5). The ungodly, K. Really think about that--the ungodly. Don't make the mistake of thinking that you have to be godly enough to merit being justified, that if you are TOO ungodly, then God won't or can't justify you or draw you to Himself. That's making light of sin, and making much more of yourself than you are.

Jac, you recently also countered with -- if we were born when Hitler was, and experienced the that exact same things in life, etc then we would have made the same decisions. I disagree. This is far from obvious and to believe this makes who we are all fatalistic. If 1000 different people were placed in Hitler's exact same circumstances and experiences, since I believe God also created "free" beings -- I believe you'd like have 1000 different responses and lives. Sure we're influenced by our biology and environment to a large degree, but 100%?? No, I don't believe so and I don't know why any Christian would opt to believe this.

To believe that our choices and actions, even thoughts, are simply determined products of our make-up, environment and experiences is Determinism. And I don't believe in Determinism because such means I am forced to disregard what I intuitively believe is true -- namely that "I" truly do exist, that "I" really do have moral choices in life, that concepts of justice and fairness really are true.

To say that we are merely determined beings, is akin to saying we are simply a bunch of chemicals playing out according to physical laws -- and this suffers all the same philosophical problems that Naturalists have -- which mind you very strongly swing me towards God's existence.

You didn't read me carefully enough. I did not say that I WOULD have made the same decision. Look at what I actually said:

• And while you may think that you are better than people like Hitler, I don't. I cannot honestly say that if I were in his shoes, with his raising, with his background, with his power, that I would not have done the same thing. There but by the grace of God go I! K, I am NO better than the worst of sinners.

I'm pointing to capability. We all have free will, but to say that you would NOT have done that were you in his shoes is to actually deny free will, K. You are saying that you aren't capable of choosing something. Now, you might not be capable of choosing that in this life the way you've lived now (although, who knows?!?), but if you had had his life, then you obviously WOULD have been able to choose it. You are capable of that type of sin, K. So am I. We all are. It's part of the fallen human condition.

So I don't think the critique you've offered against me here is relevant at all, because while I'm sure it wasn't intentional, it's a straw man.

[jlay]

Of course they cry out for justice. And, K, that justice was completely fulfilled in Christ's work on the Cross. It wouldn't matter if Hitler did or did not come to Him for forgiveness. God's wrath against his sin has already been satisfied. You're just back to offering the traditional view of unlimited (not universal) atonement--the idea that the atonement is sufficient for all be efficient only for those who believe. Note your own words I started with. ALL wrongs against God have been paid in full by Christ. You cant say that and turn around and say, "but only if you trust Him for it," because then they have not ALL been paid. The only ones that have been paid on that view is the ones of those who believe. So you either need to be consistent with your original wording it to be consistent with what you later state, something like, "The punishment for ALL wrong against God [committed by those who believe in Christ] was paid in full such that God's righteous requirements were met in Christ."

Jac,

I tend to lean towards this view. But there is one verse in its simplest reading that has always caused me to give it a second thought.
"I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins." John 8:24

obviously in the temporal sense, this is prior to the cross. But that still doesn't quite answer the question for me. Jesus is saying here that unbelief means that their sins are still upon them.