Divorce: Are all unions ordained by God in the first place?

[Verifyveritas76]

Explain to me John 12:40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them."

If God has blinded some and caused them to be deaf, who is ultimately responsible for thier sin? It does provide intent. Therefore, it could be said that God did preordain them to sin. But God does take credit for it and then offers a solution in His Son, which is stated as a gift and can not be obtained by works, the whole point of Paul's discussion of Grace and works.

You quote that passage and present it as if it was a proactive action by God, thereby rendering those people innocent of their own actions. Either you have very selective reading glasses that proactively keep you from reading the verses around it, or you have deliberately misconstrued the passage to support your argument. God’s actions in this passage are reactive and resultant to the unbelief mentioned two verses previously (an action they performed in spite of the three years Christ had been among them)
It is also a passage that is significant in its timing, as this is immediately before the Last Passover, indicating that there comes a point where there are no more chances, much like Esau in Hebrews 12:17.

But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them

The problem here is the idea of eternal hell. An eternal hell makes God unjust, a 'lake of fire' correction places creation in God's hands to do as He has preordained.

You should probably read Romans 2:2, 6,7,and 8 again. God is just and his judgement is true, He will render to every man according to his due. To those who live righteously: eternal life, to those who live unrighteously: indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. This is a reactive sentencing.

I see no problem with either an eternal hell or a lake of fire. God is both just and sovereign. He does not sentence without just cause, and whatever he chooses is his right as sovereign.

The funny thing is you seem to be making a distinction between them and are ok with one but not the other, when they are most likely one and the same.

Once you enter a roller coaster the ride is preordained, but you still enjoy it.

but you chose to enter that particular ride. This is a poor argument for your point.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I just posted this to facebook in a post on One Flesh

 

[rockfox]

I see no problem with either an eternal hell or a lake of fire. God is both just and sovereign. He does not sentence without just cause, and whatever he chooses is his right as sovereign.

God is just. But eternal lake of fire isn't nice; I think that's the real objection.

 

[Cap]

You quote that passage and present it as if it was a proactive action by God, thereby rendering those people innocent of their own actions. Either you have very selective reading glasses that proactively keep you from reading the verses around it, or you have deliberately misconstrued the passage to support your argument. God’s actions in this passage are reactive and resultant to the unbelief mentioned two verses previously (an action they performed in spite of the three years Christ had been among them)
It is also a passage that is significant in its timing, as this is immediately before the Last Passover, indicating that there comes a point where there are no more chances, much like Esau in Hebrews 12:17.

But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them


You should probably read Romans 2:2, 6,7,and 8 again. God is just and his judgement is true, He will render to every man according to his due. To those who live righteously: eternal life, to those who live unrighteously: indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. This is a reactive sentencing.

I see no problem with either an eternal hell or a lake of fire. God is both just and sovereign. He does not sentence without just cause, and whatever he chooses is his right as sovereign.

The funny thing is you seem to be making a distinction between them and are ok with one but not the other, when they are most likely one and the same.


but you chose to enter that particular ride. This is a poor argument for your point.

Sorry for the interruption, but you seriously don't believe that this is a reactive response on God's part? This is a prophecy about what if going to happen in the future. How can it be reactive? The reason for the unbelief is because of God's actions and He takes full responsibility for it and that's the point for the New Testament, the solution to the problem.

In regards to eternal punishment, what about Jubilee, what about the law of 40 lashes, there is a limit to punishment. If there wasn't God would be unjust and a tyrent. I am curious, why do Christians need an eternal hell? Is it a hedge? Is it a part of the fire and brimstone preaching they are use to? Are they afraid that souls will be lost if someone claims there is a way out? Consider your own life, do you think that you would have come to the same conclusion with out suffering? Christ's message is suffering, we each have to face it. For those who accept Christ in this life they face a wooden yoke. For those who do not, an iron yoke. But in the end, all will reach the same place.

The roller coaster analogy is an analogy, eventually they break down. But if you want to continue in your line of thinking, for you to choose to decide on the ride, who decided you were to be born to make the decision?

 

[rockfox]

If there wasn't God would be unjust and a tyrent. I am curious, why do Christians need an eternal hell?

The scriptures teach it, so we believe it. God isn't judged by our ideas of justice. Only God determines what is right and just.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Sorry for the interruption, but you seriously don't believe that this is a reactive response on God's part? This is a prophecy about what if going to happen in the future. How can it be reactive? The reason for the unbelief is because of God's actions and He takes full responsibility for it and that's the point for the New Testament, the solution to the problem.

It appears to be pretty obvious that the passage is seeing fulfilled the past prophecy of Isaiah in that moment. God has given them 3 years to accept their Messiah, and now is reacting to their present unbelief. Cursing them with blindness and hardness of hearts because of their unbelief. Their unbelief is not because of their blindness and hardness of heart. Its the other way around. You should probably reread that part of the passage. It doesnt come close to saying what you say it says.

In regards to eternal punishment, what about Jubilee, what about the law of 40 lashes, there is a limit to punishment. If there wasn't God would be unjust and a tyrent.

.
Jubilee is about restoring someone to their rightful ownership. The law of 40 lashes does not negate the law of death. Death is the limit of mortal punishment, not 40 lashes, save 1. There’s no coming back from that one.

Its not Gods will that any should perish, but repentance is a requirement to escape destruction. Just because God doesnt wanna destroy the unrighteous, in no way proves that he wont.

The roller coaster analogy is an analogy, eventually they break down. But if you want to continue in your line of thinking, for you to choose to decide on the ride, who decided you were to be born to make the decision?

This question makes no sense. Its like telling the joke about the two ducks in the bathtub. First duck says to the other, pass me the SOAP. The other says, what d’ya think I am, a typewriter?

 

[Cap]

The scriptures teach it, so we believe it. God isn't judged by our ideas of justice. Only God determines what is right and just.

What you are saying is your interpretation of scripture teach that. There are other interpretations. The scriptures teach monogamy to some. Until God opens thier eyes, that is how they interpret it. If God is not judged by our understanding of justice, and determines right and wrong, how do you know that He can't accomplish His justice without eternal hell, besides your interpretation? There are clearly other people who can interpret it another way, who is to say they are wrong?

 

[rockfox]

What you are saying is your interpretation of scripture teach that. There are other interpretations. The scriptures teach monogamy to some. Until God opens thier eyes, that is how they interpret it. If God is not judged by our understanding of justice, and determines right and wrong, how do you know that He can't accomplish His justice without eternal hell, besides your interpretation? There are clearly other people who can interpret it another way, who is to say they are wrong?

So you don't believe in absolute truth then? Or at least don't believe it can be known?

 

[Cap]

So you don't believe in absolute truth then? Or at least don't believe it can be known?

Yes I do believe in absolute truth, I just don't believe you have it. Knowing it is what we are to strive for in life to find God, or become closer to His presents. Not all are at the same place.

 

[Cap]

It appears to be pretty obvious that the passage is seeing fulfilled the past prophecy of Isaiah in that moment. God has given them 3 years to accept their Messiah, and now is reacting to their present unbelief. Cursing them with blindness and hardness of hearts because of their unbelief. Their unbelief is not because of their blindness and hardness of heart. Its the other way around. You should probably reread that part of the passage. It doesnt come close to saying what you say it says.

.
Jubilee is about restoring someone to their rightful ownership. The law of 40 lashes does not negate the law of death. Death is the limit of mortal punishment, not 40 lashes, save 1. There’s no coming back from that one.

Its not Gods will that any should perish, but repentance is a requirement to escape destruction. Just because God doesnt wanna destroy the unrighteous, in no way proves that he wont.


This question makes no sense. Its like telling the joke about the two ducks in the bathtub. First duck says to the other, pass me the SOAP. The other says, what d’ya think I am, a typewriter?

Belief and Unbelief Among the Jews

37Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. 38This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet:

“Lord, who has believed our message

and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?” h

39For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:

40“He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts,
so they can neither see with their eyes,
nor understand with their hearts,
nor turn—and I would heal them.” i

41Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him.

I really don't see how you see this as reactive. This is a fulfilled prophecy of the future from Isaiah's point of view.

Even so, is this reactive?

Exodus 4:21
The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go

Pharoh hadn't done anything yet when this was said. God had a purpose and sets in motion the things He needs done for the benefit of His Creation.


You are correct that Jubilee is about restoring to the rightful ownership, but whose ownership are we being restored too? We were once slaves to sin, so now we have a new owner and since every knee will bow, those too will have a new owner. What owner of a slave would immediately send that slave to a place of no value to the owner? The 40 lashes were the limit to earthly courts established by God. The death penalty was an appeal to a higher court for judgement. The lake of fire is that judgement. No need for eternal torment.

If the analogy doesn't work for you, forget about it

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Not everyone was blinded or had their hearts hardened in Christs day. Some heard and believed, and some heard but refused to believe.
I did some more study into this passage. When Isaiah gives this quote, it was not prophecy. Isaiah 6:9-11. It was a message for the people of Isaiah’s day. John is simply referring to it to explain why some refused to believe. In Isaiah 5, it is made excruciatingly obvious that their blindness is a result of their disobedience and rebellion. In fact, they have become so rebellious that God is blinding them so that they will not repent. He is determined to punish them and if they repent, he cant. So he blinds them and hardens their heart. Yes, this is the epitome of reactive.

There is such a thing as a reprobate mind. One is not born with it, but is eventually shunned by God or something to that effect so that punishment will happen. Romans 1:28. Jannes and Jambres are two men who are noted as resisting the truth; men of corrupt minds and reprobate concerning the faith.

Forty lashes were not the limit of the earthly courts, death was. The Jubilees only benefited the Jewish landowners. Those who were landowners in covenant with God. Its an exclusive benefit, not for everyone.
It is an assumption that because some will bow the knee, that this means that they will escape their destruction.

I also missed the part where anyone ever comes out of the lake of fire that goes into it. Rev. 20:10 says that the beast and false prophet and devil are in the lake of fire and brimstone, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Verse 14 and 15 says that death and hell are cast into it also, and then whoever is not found written in the book of life is cast into the lake of fire. Rev. 21:8 says that the fearful, and unbelieving and the abominable, and murdereers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars will have their own part there as well. Evidently, lots and lots are cast into it. Any verses you can quote where anyone ever comes out?

 

[Cap]

I understand your argument in God hardening and blinding people and it's easy to see why this is a difficult subject but there are lots of things being left out that you and I probably don't have the time to really go into. Every life is dealt with differently by God. Some blinded some not. Some recieve rewards here on earth some in heaven. First will be last. I still don't understand why it is necessary for Christians to believe God can't save/restore all of creation in whatever way He has to to get the job done. (Don't let Calvin get in the way). To purify gold heat must be applied, but not to destroy it forever.

But the ultimate argument about eternal hell is in the true meaning of aion.

Take a look at Revelation 14:11. “And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.”

The words “for ever and ever” comes from the Greek word “aion” which has a limit and doesn’t mean eternality, so in Rev. 14:11 there’s a time period to be tormented. How long? Only God knows. If there is a time limit, what happens next after the torment? I guess the argument would be death, but that would be unrealistic if God is truly Love.

The word "aion" has been used by Greek classical writers to reference to “limited duration” and not “eternal.” The reason must don't entertain the idea of aion not meaning everlasting is a deeper understanding of what it really means to hate your brother.

 

[frederick]

Hi Cap, if you take a look at a verse like e.g. Matthew 25:46, you will see that the word "everlasting" for everlasting punishment and everlasting life is from the same Greek word. The duration of the punishment is the same as the life - everlasting. Your understanding is not consistent with the evidence in this and similar texts. Shalom.

 

[Keith Martin]

Hi Cap, if you take a look at a verse like e.g. Matthew 25:46, you will see that the word "everlasting" for everlasting punishment and everlasting life is from the same Greek word. The duration of the punishment is the same as the life - everlasting. Your understanding is not consistent with the evidence in this and similar texts. Shalom.

The logic would actually run in the other direction: given that 'aion' means the same thing as our English word 'eon' or 'age', and given that 'aion' is the word or the root of the words in both passages, logically that would indicate that neither means 'forever,' much less 'forever and ever.' Instead, they each indicate a finite, time-limited period of time, which translates into them being temporary. Scripture also indicates that the Adversary will spend the longest period of time in the lake of fire. If anyone who goes in is in there forever, then it becomes nearly senseless to compare how long anyone is in there compared to others.

Having said that, I recognize that @Cap and I are at one place on the spectrum of all the possible legitimate beliefs one can interpret from the multitudes of (fallible, due to being human) translations of the original scriptural manuscripts -- and most on here are at other places, and usually not to close to where Cap and I have landed. I don't want to argue about this, because I respect the beliefs of others and request that others respect my beliefs.

I just wanted to point out a logical fallacy.

 

[rockfox]

The logic would actually run in the other direction: given that 'aion' means the same thing as our English word 'eon' or 'age', and given that 'aion' is the word or the root of the words in both passages, logically that would indicate that neither means 'forever,' much less 'forever and ever.'

No. https://biblehub.com/greek/166.htm

 

[frederick]

I don't want to argue about this, because I respect the beliefs of others and request that others respect my beliefs.

I just wanted to point out a logical fallacy.

Keith, no disrespect is intended but there is nothing fallacious in the logic which says; The duration of the punishment is the same as the life - everlasting. The Greek text is clear. Cheers

 

[Keith Martin]

Biblehub is far from infallible. Even the link @rockfox provided demonstrates the confusion their hodgepodge of scholarship opens up. The primary definition says something about eternal, but then down in the elaboration it points out exactly what I would have written about aionios: it means age-lasting, not ever-lasting. Many translations, out of desire for the interpretations they've wanted to peddle, have translated aionios as everlasting and aion as forever, but if aion means age and aionios means age-lasting, it is only wishful thinking (or perhaps overly-fearful) thinking that they mean forever and forever-lasting.

Biblehub is guilty of completely ignoring certain whole passages of Hebrew and Greek in favor of interpretations that have been popularized by the Organized Churches due to those Churches desire to promote agendas that benefit them rather than benefit truth.

 

[Keith Martin]

And I promise that you can say whatever you want in response to that, and I will let you have the last word, because, from my frame of reference, you will be just as much my brother no matter what you believe about such issues.

 

[rockfox]

You only get that by looking at the often questionable Strong's Concordance definition of the root word. The more detailed Thayers on the other hand...

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 166: αἰώνιος
1. without beginning or end, that which always has been and always will be
2. without beginning
3. without end, never to cease, everlasting:

Even Strong's Exhaustive Concordance says, "eternal, forever, everlasting"

Both you and Cap are arguing from presupposition, not evidence.

 

[Cap]

Hi Cap, if you take a look at a verse like e.g. Matthew 25:46, you will see that the word "everlasting" for everlasting punishment and everlasting life is from the same Greek word. The duration of the punishment is the same as the life - everlasting. Your understanding is not consistent with the evidence in this and similar texts. Shalom.

There is a great deal of discussion about the misuse of the translation of aion to everlasting and the context it has brought to us by the church. It is much bigger than the polygamist fight against the concept of deacons only able to have one wife. But, you can only see it if you want to, just like monogamous will not see polygamy in 1 Timothy versus about "a" wife. The ideas of "everlasting" or age abiding punishment and "everlasting" or age abiding life is two different things. They are concepts, or like a stain, commit adultery and it stays with you forever.

"Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."(Jude 7)

Is Sodom and Gomorrha still burning? No. But, they idea is everlasting, we all know that they are bad places. Just like heaven, or life in heaven, it's a concept of forever, immortality.

Here is a question for Torah, if everything is in the Law, were is everlasting hell defined in Torah? Or, is it mainly a christian concept that Torah people need? (Not at all directing this at Torah believing, just trying to find out if there is a recognition of everlasting hell in the understanding of Torah thought.)

I think the issue with everlasting hell is a bigger issue the church has gotten wrong more than polygamy, but yet no one really wants to look into it for themselves, they just rely on what they have been taught in church, which taught them monogamy. How strange is that?

There is tons of information, look it up for yourself, if you care to.