The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Poll on God's wrath

Yeah, that’s what I don’t get. Why are so many Christians convinced they are better than everyone else?

I used to be…not any more. I’m a new creation in Christ who like God has been created in righteousness and true holiness. Eph 4:24. I’m now a child of God… a saint not a sinner… before this I was just an impenitent sinner. :wink:

Depends what you mean by better? :wink: Better off spiritually for sure and now a child of God and not his enemy anymore. Pretty good news! :smiley:

God’s wrath is corrective. punitive for the sake of punitive makes no sense. as said above, it would spawn worship from fear AT BEST. at worst, it would spawn fully justified rebellion.

if the New Testament is truly a better covenant than the Old, in which rebel nations were promised corrective wrath and subsequent restoration, then how could the NT be better in fact if it took that offer back and made the expression of wrath purely vengeful, and worse - making it last forever.

it defies sense.

i may only be a little human with a little human brain, but “i who am evil still know how to give good gifts to my children, how much more so God?”

if God’s wrath is purely punitive and intended for impenitent sinners, then how many Christians are in danger? most if not all of us?

So you’re perfect…you don’t sin; hence not a sinner?

Well, its good to know that God can and does correct “impenitent” sinners…and apparently makes them saints. Honestly I have the fullest notion that your whole idea of “God doesn’t correct impenitent sinners” is completely refuted by the fact that you yourself would say you’ve been corrected out of your wicked condition and position by the work of God.

Unless, of course, you want to take the credit for your own salvation…

As for my vote on the poll, I put corrective and punitive. I however, define “punitive” as being the right and inevitable consequences that come of sin, albeit even these are ultimately corrective. Punitive for me, I liken it to the way a parent may punish their child in an effort to correct them of certain impurities in behaviour which demand that punishment be given in order to secure justice, purification, and reconciliation; for the sake of the child’s well being and blessing.

For example; if I had a child who threw a dinner plate across the at his little sister’s face in order to hurt her, and did it on purpose, and that dinner plate hit her indeed - that child of mine would not be getting a mere talking to, he must face the consequences for his actions, he must understand that for what he has dealt out to others by choice, he must ultimately receive the fruit. He reaps what he sows.

However, like God I as a parent would not give him what he could not bear, and certainly not abuse. I wouldn’t bash his face with another dinner plate, and I wouldn’t ceaselessly bash his face in with a cast-iron skillet that grows larger and heavier on into eternity.

I’d give him righteous punishment, until the behaviour has been corrected out of him, and his sister has received justice and reconciliation with her brother who harmed her.

I suppose at the end of the day the options “corrective only” and “corrective and punitive” are synonymous options, only the latter option includes “punitive” as a descriptive sign post as to one of the options by which God does his corrective work. “Punitive Only” however, is a violent option, defaming God, as we who are sane all know well enough.

:open_mouth: If you don’t know the difference between the HS drawing people to salvation and regenerating them from sin and death and God “chastising” unbelievers for remedial purposes then I don’t know what to tell ya, brother. They are not the same. :unamused:

I’m not going to teach you Christianity 101 you will just reject the truth anyhow. Good day, Lefein.

Christ came to save us from sin and death, apparently that is often done by chastisement, and conviction (a form of chastening, or chiding that the Holy Spirit deals in quite well) - and in your case by the chastening and convicting work of the Holy Spirit, of God, you were brought to Salvation out of the state of being an impenitent sinner; you were corrected by the work of God who chastened you while you were yet a sinner, and brought thusly to the foot of the cross.

Clearly, it is not a matter of me “knowing the difference” between “Salvation from sin and death” and “God rescuing someone from sin and death by correcting them out of it”, considering that they are two expressions of the same thing. It would seem to me that it is not a matter of me being ignorant of Salvation and its subtleties…but rather I think, it is a refusal on your part to confess the witness that is plainly written in your own life.

You were an impenitent sinner, or so you say, and now you are not; you’re now a saint, or so you say. That can only have been done by the work of God alone, by Christ alone, unless you should be claiming any credit for your own salvation.

If however, you were an impenitent sinner and are now a saint through the Salvation given unto you by God then it follows and demands as follows that by God’s corrective action upon you in your impenitent state, you were saved and corrected from that state, and put into the state of being saved into sainthood. If therefore, you were corrected while being an impenitent sinner - then it follows that God does in fact correct impenitent sinners, chastens them, convicts them, and thereby leads them into Salvation; and hence God’s wrath is in fact used for remedial purposes of impenitent sinners, and your theology and statement that God’s wrath “never has, and never will be” used in such a fashion is refuted. And that is just good, plain, Godly common sense.

You’re a walking billboard witnessing to the fact that God and God’s wrath does in fact, correct remedially impenitent sinners. Or would you take credit for your own salvation? I don’t think you would, hence you’re a walking billboard witnessing to the fact, and that very fact refutes your position.

I already know Christianity 101, I don’t need your tutiledge, I am well acquainted, well qualified, and well studied in it. You however might need to take a basic class in humility. You aren’t the paragon of Christian thought around here, and quite frankly, I have the littlest confidence in your capacity to teach, having even littler confidence in your academic abilities.

And seeing as how you edited your first post, I will respond likewise to it apart from what you edited; as it is similar and I answered much about it in the previous post, but it deserves its own consideration.

The Holy Spirit drawing people to salvation, and regenerating them - God by his Holy Spirit through Christ saving them from sin and death, correcting them out of the state of being an impenitent sinner, and hence correcting them into the state of being a saint, is God chastening an unbeliever, or an “impenitent sinner” (as your original statement names the category);

Otherwise the sinner would never be drawn to salvation in the first place, you would never have been drawn.
God is plainly shown to be chastening the sinner for the remedial purpose of correcting that sinner, for the purpose of making him into a saint, by the very act of drawing that sinner to salvation in the first place. God by drawing a sinner to salvation, and the inevitable regeneration that follows, is God chastening that sinner for remedial purpose. If they are not the same, then your salvation and mine is impotent, and void. Unless of course, we want to take credit for our own salvation, but that is off the table as we both know.

Either God saves us, or we save ourselves. If God saves us, then it immediately follows that God does in fact act upon the impenitent sinner for the remedial purpose of correcting that sinner. And in my experience and from the testimony of multitudes of Christians, God’s remedial action upon the sinner often comes via chastening, especially conviction.

I can go ask any evangelical convert and five times out of seven I will hear for their testimony that they received Salvation because of God had convicted them of their sins and chastened them for committing them.

Salvation is a joint effort, Lefein. God provides the grace. We provide the faith. When our faith extends and meets God’s grace we get born again. :wink: The Holy Spirit convicts people of sin, righteousness and judgment unto salvation. He does not chasten them unto salvation, Lefein. Lord have mercy. :confused:

I will remind you that it is God, and God alone, who gives a man his measure of faith. We are not the source of our faith. I will also add that we can do nothing apart from God, nothing. That includes any joint effort endeavours - especially the endeavour of receiving salvation.

Both of which come from God, are exercised in God, and are utilised unto the purposes of God.

I believe your insistence that conviction and chastisement are in mutually exclusive categories is arbitrary and semantic at best, and outright dishonest at worst.

The conviction and the chastening of the Holy Spirit go hand in hand. When the Holy Spirit convicts, the Holy Spirit chastens. And I have yet to see you make a proper rebuttal, outside of assertions, and outside of eye rolling condescension; both of which I find to be a poor witness on your part, and certainly a poor witness as to the validity of your position.

Conviction is a form of chastening.

I invite you to make a valid rebuttal, a rebuttal mind you, not yet another baseless assertion.

[size=85][/size]

I understand what you’re trying to say, Lefein but the chastening in Hebrews 12:5-8 does not extend to unbelievers. God says so…Its not my opinion. I’m not going to spend anymore time arguing with you about this. Either you accept it or you don’t. No problem.

Then I will be sure to look even more deeply and specifically into Hebrews 12:5-8 and surrounding context, which I believe does apply to sinners. But at least you understand my position, and that will do for now.

As needs must. Thank you for the discussion.

You’re welcome but I will discuss Hebrews 12:5-8 with you in my thread Words used for “Chasetening” not used for the impenitent with the rest of the OP. :wink:

Voted Both, btw.

I don’t know what they mean by better. But there’s strong us vs them sentiments in many communities I’ve been in. They talk about how they’re saved, while calling everyone else dead. They call themselves righteous, while calling others wicked. They say they’re children of God, and call the others rejectors of God. The judgmentalism is through the roof.

In the Orthodox tradition, you’re not a saint just for believing in God… and even saints are sinners… but saint is a title to be earned and it’s not for everyone but for people of great faith and trials. Yet Christians who go home and beat their wife think they’re saints.

Then they wonder why atheists hate us.

I put both, not because I believe that God is releasing His anger and frustration with the sinner, but because I think the correction cannot help being the retribution.

Let’s say you’ve betrayed a friend in some way, for your own (perceived) benefit. You realize almost immediately the horrible thing you’ve done, but it’s done and you can’t undo it. You can confess and beg forgiveness (if that won’t hurt your friend even more), but you WILL suffer for this sin. The suffering is cleansing – your sorrow leads you to genuine repentance – but it is also in a very real sense a punishment or a natural result of your actions.

Perhaps in that sense, we all agree, but possibly don’t see it as retributive. But that’s my take on it. I think the process of restoration is a punishing experience and in that sense is also retributive.

Blessings, Cindy

I see what you’re saying Cindy and that makes sense.

The only thing required being classified as a “saint” or holy one is being born again. You don’t earn sainthood. There are numerous scriptures of Paul addressing Christians as saints. :smiley:

Bird

The only thing required being classified a “saint” or holy one is being born again. You don’t earn sainthood. There are numerous scriptures of Paul addressing Christians as saints. :smiley:

I would never dare compare myself to Paul or something, so I don’t know about that.