Salvation

[Stardust]

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life." This implies we are not worthy but God through his grace loved us enough to do something about it anyway to make a way for us to be redeemed.

So god says were not worthy but after i send my son to be killed you will be.

Such an unnecessary sacrifice.

[Jac3510]

So god says were not worthy of being saved from his wrath, but then decides to send himself to earth to be killed and that somehow makes him less angry at us but we are still just as unworthy, but he's not as mad enough at us anymore because he let us kill him, so as long as we go on believing that god let himself be killed so he didn't have to punish us then were of gods hook?

So if the son sacrificed himself to the father but the son is the father then the son sacrificed himself to himself.
If jesus is god and the son of go then god impregnated his own mother.

The Son is not the Father. You have failed to grasp some very elementary Christian truths, and yet you presume to critique. As such, you are critiquing a straw man, which is to say, you are being irrational (forgive me for not being shocked given what you revealed about yourself in your previous post). And you presume to do so with a particular rudeness that demonstrates not merely a lack of respect for those to whom you speak, but outright vitriol. And that tells me that you aren't interested in honest conversation. You are little more than a preacher, and not a very good one at that. I've little doubt of how long you (won't) be with us.

Ok so forgive me for not being a mental health expert, maybe god is psychotic and schizophrenic, im sure you understood what i meant.

Your ignorance of rather basic mental health concepts is forgiveable. Your intention to demonstrate your ignorance for the purpose of insulting just makes you look both childish and ridiculous. This is precisely where I adhere to the wisdom of Prov 26:4. I will only leave you with this bit of pastoral advice: I would suggest you seek the help of a professional counselor (given what you've said so far, an LMFT (the 'F' being the important part, in your case) rather than an LPC would likely be most helpful) to work with you on some of this, because what you need is not an education but, right now, to work though some of your pain.

[B. W.]

So god says were not worthy of being saved from his wrath, but then decides to send himself to earth to be killed and that somehow makes him less angry at us but we are still just as unworthy, but he's not as mad enough at us anymore because he let us kill him, so as long as we go on believing that god let himself be killed so he didn't have to punish us then were of gods hook?

So if the son sacrificed himself to the father but the son is the father then the son sacrificed himself to himself.
If jesus is god and the son of go then god impregnated his own mother.

The Son is not the Father. You have failed to grasp some very elementary Christian truths, and yet you presume to critique. As such, you are critiquing a straw man, which is to say, you are being irrational (forgive me for not being shocked given what you revealed about yourself in your previous post). And you presume to do so with a particular rudeness that demonstrates not merely a lack of respect for those to whom you speak, but outright vitriol. And that tells me that you aren't interested in honest conversation. You are little more than a preacher, and not a very good one at that. I've little doubt of how long you (won't) be with us.

Ok so forgive me for not being a mental health expert, maybe god is psychotic and schizophrenic, im sure you understood what i meant.

Your ignorance of rather basic mental health concepts is forgiveable. Your intention to demonstrate your ignorance for the purpose of insulting just makes you look both childish and ridiculous. This is precisely where I adhere to the wisdom of Prov 26:4. I will only leave you with this bit of pastoral advice: I would suggest you seek the help of a professional counselor (given what you've said so far, an LMFT (the 'F' being the important part, in your case) rather than an LPC would likely be most helpful) to work with you on some of this, because what you need is not an education but, right now, to work though some of your pain.

Stardust is former banned member Outlaw as per simple IT work shows. Some folks accuse us mod's for showing so little grace and others say we show to much. It doesn't matter, fact is we show grace and in the process, those, like Outlaw by there own words and actions demonstrate a continual abuse of grace. In this, for one wise and humble enough to see, is why God allows choice to stop the abuse of grace or continue abuse grace. The Cross reveals that same principle. Someday, there will be a cut off time for those that abuse God's grace and their end result is not good.

Stadust aka Outlaw was re-banned for posting a foul worded video as well as re-entry to forum under stealth and add with this what Jac pointed out to him as well.
-
-
-

[1over137]

I guess I will pray for outlaw and his Christian wife.
Reading this http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... fe#p161370 ...
and seeing how he behaved here... well...

[PaulSacramento]

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life." This implies we are not worthy but God through his grace loved us enough to do something about it anyway to make a way for us to be redeemed.

That doesn't imply ANYTHING other than God loving the world SO MUCH that His only begotten Son willingly gave himself up for it.
There is nothing there that implies alack of worth, sorry.
One can argue the contrary actually.

There is a lack of logic, of reason, in regards to a God that sees no worth in something but is willing to die for it and that is Stardust's issue with this view and it is a valid one.

Rick mentioned that me saying that humans are NOT worthy of salvation BUT me also saying that Jesus believes that human are worth saving is basically be calling Jesus a liar.
I don't see it that way.
How many times do we see people with no sense of self-worth, people that end up killing themselves because they have no sense of self-worth, that they believe they are worthless?
Too many to be honest.
Yet, there is always someone willing to try to save them because THEY vale THEM.

God values US and though we are not worthy of salvation in regards to DOING something deserving of eternal life, God most certainly values US enough to offer us salvation.

That is my view on the matter.

[RickD]

Paul,

I think it's clear that God loves us. That's clearly shown in John 3:16, and elsewhere. But Jac made a good point. God cannot value us. We cannot say we have worth to God. That would imply that God is not God. If God values something, it would mean He is not complete in Himself. Why can't we just take scripture for what it says? For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son...

It doesn't say "For God so valued humanity that He gave..."

[PaulSacramento]

Paul,

I think it's clear that God loves us. That's clearly shown in John 3:16, and elsewhere. But Jac made a good point. God cannot value us. We cannot say we have worth to God. That would imply that God is not God. If God values something, it would mean He is not complete in Himself. Why can't we just take scripture for what it says? For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son...

It doesn't say "For God so valued humanity that He gave..."

Oh yes I understand and see the point.
I think we are basically, as always, trying to understand God on human terms ( how else can we understand God?) and the issue is how can God love and yet see no value?
If God values something then He isn't whole? I don't know if I agree because Valuing something doesn't = NEEDING it.
God can love something other than Himself, this we agree on, He doesn't NEED TO, He chooses to.
So, God can value something without needing to ( and again I don't think that value = need anyway so..).

[melanie]

Worthy by definition means to be of value. They are one in the same.
There is a difference in one believing they are entitled, or deserving of salvation, that would point towards a work-based ideology of salvation, that would be misguided.
We are worthy, or I will go out on a limb and speak for myself and say very confidently I am worthy.
I am not deserving, as that is a sense of entitlement but I am loved by my Father, and through His love and yes His grace, I am worthy of salvation, not because I say so but because His love determines it.
Jesus did not suffer on that cross because it was 'fitting' for Him to do so, He did it because He values, and loves, and deeply cherishes each and every one of us individually.
Every time I fell my furtherest from God I have felt His hand the strongest, guiding and loving me, sometimes with some harsh, wake-up call urgency but always right by my side. Because He chose me. When life told me I was unworthy, God told me I was worthy. When people told me I was unworthy, God showed me how deeply cherished I was, when I could barely lift my eyes to Him and I told myself I was unworthy, my Father told me 'enough', and showered His never ceasing, unconditional love upon me. I am worthy of His love, by His love He offers me salvation.
John 16:15 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.
We are chosen, known, loved and deeply valued and cherished by our Heavenly Father. That is His nature. That is why we were created, to share and know His love, that is why Jesus made that sacrifice on the cross. He values us so much that He wants every one of us to share in eternal life with Him. Because He doesn't want us anywhere but home, with Him. That's love, that is a Father that values His children immensely and tremendously.
If the creator, king of kings, most high God says I'm worthy, if He can see me as worthy when I can't even see myself as such then I'm going to take that gift that I am not deserving or entitled too and I'm going to treasure it like He treasures me.
Romans 8:37-39 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
How can such deep love not equate to value?
Love that nothing can separate, not even sin.
Everything that is loved is valued.
Jesus was God in the flesh and he valued the most pitiful of us all when the world told them they were nothing. He was mocked and ridiculed for hanging out and sharing His love and wisdom with the low lives, the prostitutes. He got on His knees and washed the feet of the disciples, our greatest teacher, our Lord, showing us the absolute beauty of humility. Jesus showed us time and time again the great value we are to Him. If we were not then He would never have done what He did.
That is why I am worthy. Because I honour my saviour, and He says I am.
When we think humans are unworthy of salvation we are looking at humanity through the lens of sin, we are determining the value of mankind based on their behaviours. If we look at humanity through the eyes of Jesus He had no question of, "Do I have to save them Father?" He came to "save the world." Jesus wasn't thinking on the cross, "They sure are unworthy of what I'm doing for them." The love God has for humanity makes us worthy. Love gives worth to that which lacks value. There are objects that we treasure that wouldn't be worth a few bucks if we tried to sell them. When you treasure something that makes it valuable, that makes it worth saving. When you deeply treasure something you'll do whatever it takes to save it.

[RickD]

Mel and Paul,

I hear what you're saying. I just think when it gets down to the meanings, when we a humans, say we value someone in the sense that's implied here, we're saying we would be missing that person if he wasn't with us. In other words, we would be incomplete without him/her. And we can't really say God would be incomplete without us. Because then He wouldn't be God.

I think I'd rather just stick with what scripture says about this. And God's love for me is more than enough. Unless I'm missing something from scripture that says we are worth something to God.
Scripture is clear that God loves us. But I can't see anything saying He values us.

Again, Christ died for us because of who He is. Not because of us, or our value.

And maybe we're saying almost the same thing. I don't know. It just seems like adding value into the salvation issue, is just an emotional argument. I just don't see it as scriptural.

[Jac3510]

It just seems like adding value into the salvation issue, is just an emotional argument.

Exactly.

It's understandable. Human beings cannot separate emotions from behavior or even from thought processes. One of my objections to much of what passes as Christian counseling is the constant advice to tell people to ignore their emotions. That's not only unhelpful (worse, it is harmful), but it is impossible given the way we are constituted.

But God is not so constituted. So, going back to what Paul said, we are trying to understand God on human terms. Since for us to love something is to value it, we assume that for God to love something is to value it. But that's where the analogies have to break down. Remembering that all language about God is ultimately metaphorical on some level, we have to be prepared to say that at some point everything we say about Him misses the mark at some point. And so it is with this. Yes, God loves us. Absolutely! But are we "worth" anything to God? Strictly speaking, the answer is no. Again, our problem here is emotional, not logical. We cannot conceive of what it would mean to love something without it having worth to us. But that is because love is such an emotional concept. And if may go back to John 3:16, this is why I ultimately disagree with Paul on how to translate it. It does NOT say that God loved us "so much" that He gave His son. The word "so" there is a fine translation if we are using Old English (as the KJV does). But the real idea there seems to be "in this manner." So the verse should be translated, "This is the way God loved the world: He gave His only Son . . ." (which is the way the NET renders it, by the way).

So the benefits of this view are several:

1. We get to take Scripture at its own words rather than what we think it ought to say (we aren't adding to Scripture);
2. We get to avoid self-contradictory statements, like saying that both are and are not worthy of salvation;
3. We get to answer the question stardust posed in terms of the praiseworthiness of Jesus' actions. In fact, I can turn his argument on its head. If we ARE worthy of salvation, then Jesus' actions are NOT praiseworthy, because He was just doing what He (being God) was obligated to do for us, anyway; and
4. We get to affirm God's absolute deity, His aseity, and His sovereignty. He does not need us. We do not complete Him in any way. He neither loses nor gains anything from us. Therefore, He cannot value us, for to value us would mean we have intrinsic worth to Him, which would mean that if we were lost to Him, He would lose something of intrinsic worth, which God cannot do and still be God.

All in all, it's best, then, to avoid the emotional argument. Recognize it for what it is: a conflation of human and divine nature. God is not a mere human. Say what Scripture says. He loves us even as we are unworthy of His love and even as we are worth nothing to Him. Instead, He loves us for OUR benefit.

[Philip]

What God values in humans is due to what He knows we will be AFTER He thus transforms us - He sees great value in what we will one day become (perfected), and that this is ALL and ONLY due to His love, grace and transformational efforts (you cannot separate these). God values in us what only HE does and transforms us to becoming. And, as Christians who are yet still humans, that transformation begins on earth. Before we are thus transformed, there is no real value in us, as we are merely corrupted, constantly sinful flesh. And once we are saved, HE lives within us. He highly values those who have His Spirit within. But as God is all-knowing, He sees our transformed selves before that happens. He see's our entire lives - both mortal and eternal - on the same page, ALL at once - and thus what God values - in His eyes - are all part of the very same package.

[PaulSacramento]

Mel and Paul,

I hear what you're saying. I just think when it gets down to the meanings, when we a humans, say we value someone in the sense that's implied here, we're saying we would be missing that person if he wasn't with us. In other words, we would be incomplete without him/her. And we can't really say God would be incomplete without us. Because then He wouldn't be God.

I think I'd rather just stick with what scripture says about this. And God's love for me is more than enough. Unless I'm missing something from scripture that says we are worth something to God.
Scripture is clear that God loves us. But I can't see anything saying He values us.

Again, Christ died for us because of who He is. Not because of us, or our value.

And maybe we're saying almost the same thing. I don't know. It just seems like adding value into the salvation issue, is just an emotional argument. I just don't see it as scriptural.

Yes it is an emotional argument.
That said I don't see the issue with God valuing us ( or anything else).
Value does NOT = need so God valuing Us doesn't make Him any "less God" than He is.
There is a reason God created, it is a statement of His nature.
There was no NEED to create, there is no need to value His creation.
That God choose to value His creation is obviously His choice.
To say that God CAN'T value anything other then Himself is, well, limiting God isn't it?

Valuing something is a judgement, we decide is something, someone has value, so does God.

He doesn't value us based on what we DO or CAN DO, but because we are His creation, we are His and He loves US.

There is NO NEED to associate our value ( or lack thereof) with anything we DO.
Our value is whatever God deems it to be and he "values us enough" to love us.
Not because of what we are or what we do, but because of what HE IS.

[B. W.]

What God values in humans is due to what He knows we will be AFTER He thus transforms us - He sees great value in what we will one day become (perfected), and that this is ALL and ONLY due to His love, grace and transformational efforts (you cannot separate these). God values in us what only HE does and transforms us to becoming. And, as Christians who are yet still humans, that transformation begins on earth. Before we are thus transformed, there is no real value in us, as we are merely corrupted, constantly sinful flesh. And once we are saved, HE lives within us. He highly values those who have His Spirit within. But as God is all-knowing, He sees our transformed selves before that happens. He see's our entire lives - both mortal and eternal - on the same page, ALL at once - and thus what God values - in His eyes - are all part of the very same package.

Paul wrote in Eph 3:18-19 that we may comprehend God's love but that it remains incomprehensible deeper than anything we can imagine still. With that, I am content when speaking on this subject topic here just brought up.

What you have are two christian view points, one Western and the other Eastern. The West, teaches basically that humanity is nothing to God and we are not needed in the scheme of things before God, he saved not because we are worthy but because of who he is to himself. The Eastern views that God for his own purpose and nature of love is why he set out to save men and women before the foundation of the world. Both have a connecting view point in this regard: God saved because of himself in the simplest form. I have left out several details between the two view points just to avoid rabbits trials. Just sticking to the topic here.

The East adds that due to Gen 1:26 - it is the image and likeness of God human beings were fashioned is why God's loves humanity and with love also hates the distortion of of this foundation due to sin. Now, in both east and west, the image and likeness does not mean an exact duplicate but rather for example, the exercise of reason and intelligence to govern what God placed Humanity in charge of. Therefore, to claim that that God does not need humanity, while true in a sense, does not mean he did not have something assigned to man to do.

To this I add:

If God failed to keep his word in this regard, then his love, justice, mercy, righteousness, word, promises, gifts, are meaningless and thus He is not God Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient. There is more going on in Genesis chapter 1 through 3 than we realize. So yes, then his love saw worth and fellowship with mankind, however, in a far deeper manner than we can fully grasp. You could say, he so loved... because of who and what he is - God - and for that, those born again can be eternally grateful. Rev 4:11 KJV says it all - for thy pleasure all things were created... thus he remains true to all. He is without fault. Even with this insight, God's love is deeper still. Heaven will be grand!

The Western tradition holds humanity with contempt and self abasement due to the nature of sin's infestation. Almost, in a manner of some sort of Medieval/Renaissance era penance mind set built upon the divine right of kings and supreme justice of law model of that time and era for a salvation model.

The Eastern holds no one specific salvation model other than say, it is all a divine mystery why God saved humanity by the John 3:16 revelation. They have way too many theories, some good, some bad, out there regarding God's love. So test all things.

Now, lets reason together for a moment:

Does John 3:16 say, For God needed penal Substitutionary atonement for the world that he sent his son that whosoever believes in him has everlasting life....

Or - for God so loved the world that whosoever believes in him has everlasting life...

Of the two, which makes more sense?

Western PSA holds that it was because God loves he needed PSA to cover broken legal requirements of his law

The Eastern Christian mindset says, the cross is a great mystery revealing God's love and character so deep no one simple pat answer can fully capture the why; so Let's explore and fall in love with God more everyday because he so first loved us, 1 John 4:19 -

Both contain a sense of awe about God and are two sides of the same proverbial coin. Both engage human emotions which in turn changes thought (think about it)
-
-
-

[PaulSacramento]

Nicely put BW.

[Philip]

Now, lets reason together for a moment:

Does John 3:16 say, For God needed penal Substitutionary atonement for the world that he sent his son that whosoever believes in him has everlasting life....

Or - for God so loved the world that whosoever believes in him has everlasting life...

Of the two, which makes more sense?

The ultimate focus and affected OBJECTS of His love are those whom will believe. It's the qualifier ("whosoever believes in Him") that is key, as that is His condition. His purpose and ultimate objects of His love are ALL believers. So what God ultimately values is a subset of the world He came to save - again, due to what HE does to to bring this value. Perhaps this is mere semantics and the difficulty of grasping how God can presently see people just as He will, one day, transform them to be.