| Author |
Message |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 1663
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 6:20 am: |     |
Let me see if I can sum up the logical argument and provide a comparison argument.
P1: Saved people are not condemned
P2: The woman caught in adultery is not condemned
C: Therefore the woman caught in adultery is saved
P1: Cars are a wheeled vehicle
P2: Bikes are a wheeled vehicle
C: Therefore bikes are cars
And a very similar Biblical argument:
P1: The sins of believers are forgiven
P2: Jesus asked the Father to forgive the people who crucified Him
C: Therefore the people who crucified Jesus are believers
The problem is one of overlapping sets.
P1: A is a subset of B
P2: C is a subset of B
C: A and C may or may not overlap
IF we could demonstrate that the only time when God does not condemn a person is when that person is saved, then we could draw the conclusion. In this case A would no longer be a subset of B, it would be equal to B. Therefore anything that was a subset of B would have to also be a subset of A. |
Flyinglady
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady
Post Number: 9633
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 8:28 am: | |
Ric, those types of questions always confused me and still do. LOL! |
Starlabs
Registered user
Username: Starlabs
Post Number: 72
Registered: 5-2011
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 11:26 am: | |
I do know what you are saying Rick, about not knowing how she responded. I guess I'm just looking at it like if God gives us an invitation than we are His elect. He also accoding to my understanding has to give us the faith or ability to even accept His offer of Salvation. So I guess my reasoning about her accepting was based on the fact that He offered Salvation and He would also give her that faith to accept. Did he even give her the gift of Salvation or did He just extend mercy to her past sins? I thought maybe He did because He did tell her to go and sin no more.
I'm not sure if I'm correct about my assumption. But I ascribe more to the Calvinist way of thinking.
Rick I do need help with understanding about this because I have a feeling that your beliefs are really close to mine. So if you could help me out I would appreciate it.
My question is if God gives us an invitation to Salvation will He not also give us the faith to accept it? Or does He give invitations to some without also giving them faith to accept that gift? Or are we even told by Scripture how that works? I also think that there are some He never gives an invitation to. Is that correct? |
Starlabs
Registered user
Username: Starlabs
Post Number: 73
Registered: 5-2011
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 11:36 am: | |
I hadn't read your above logic problem when I wrote my post. I love logic problems. I even buy those logic magazine puzzles.
So what you are saying is that she wasn't offered salvation because he didn't condemn her for her sins and then told her to sin no more? See that's where I wasn't sure if that was an invitation to Salvation or not. |
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b
Post Number: 1665
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 12:13 pm: | |
Starlabs, our views are remarkably close on this subject; regardless of what you conclude about the salvation of this woman at the time the event was recorded.
Without attaching names to the beliefs systems, there are several different ways of understanding calling and response. And I can find at least some verses that would support making any one of these conclusions (although I think some have more support than others):
One view is that God calls everyone and gives everyone the same power to respond, we chose whether or not to respond.
The other extreme to this is that God only calls some, but that His call is irresistable so that all who are called respond.
I'm still not certain how all the pieces fit together, but as of today my best understanding is somewhere in between and is based on applying "many are called but few are chosen". God extends the invitation to many, perhaps even to all, those who are chosen are given the power to respond positively to that invitation. God does not reject anyone, but those who are not called and given the power to respond positively will reject Him.
I am sure that there are many other viewpoints that fall in the middle between the first two "extremes". My view on this subject underwent a radical shift some time ago and has been subject to smaller adjustments since then as I continue to try and understand the subject.
In regards to your closing questions
quote:So what you are saying is that she wasn't offered salvation because he didn't condemn her for her sins and then told her to sin no more? See that's where I wasn't sure if that was an invitation to Salvation or not.
I think it would be more accurate to say that I am not certain that she received salvation at this time. She was shown mercy, but we do not know anything about the belief response (or the potential timing of the belief response). |
Starlabs
Registered user
Username: Starlabs
Post Number: 74
Registered: 5-2011
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 8:23 pm: | |
I too am trying to understand it all. I do think that you and I have very similar beliefs. Thanks for giving me your thoughts on this subject. |
Christo
Registered user
Username: Christo
Post Number: 303
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, February 11, 2012 - 11:08 pm: | |
Jesus saved us at the cross. Of course God can do anything, but his ways are not our ways. This event was pre crucifixion, so he wasn't going to save the woman then and there. He was going to save her at the Cross like he planned to.
Hebrews 9:14
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Amen,
Chris |
Goose
Registered user
Username: Goose
Post Number: 93
Registered: 11-2011
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - 10:29 am: | |
I have read some of the discussion about the woman who had been dragged to Jesus, accused of adultery (interesting that somehow, if they were discovered in the very act, why was not the man also dragged to Jesus?)
I know of the text that says "sin is the transgression of the law." Yet, the Greek word for sin, harmatia, literally means "to miss the mark." In essence, the mark--or bulls eye--of holiness which is God's will, purpose and desire to be fulfilled by Him, for, and in us.
I thought some help from Blue Letter Bible site might help us here....
Outline of Biblical Usage
"Go"
Greek: poreuo; biblical usage: "to lead over, carry over, transfer, to pursue the journey on which one has entered, to continue on one's journey."
"sin (no more)"
The Greek word in the passage for sin sounds like harmatia, but is actually a variant, hamartano.
Root Word (Etymology)of hamartano:
Probably "alpha": 1) first letter of Greek alphabet 2) Christ is the Alpha to indicate that he is the beginning and the end.
and....
meros a) a part due or assigned to one b) lot, destiny
So, there really is a strong inference in that what Jesus had said to the woman when he uttered (in the KJV) "go and sin no more," can very well mean, "Go, become the person that God has always wanted you to be."
In this sense "Go and sin no more"--uttered from the Word of God Himself, was a liberation, a freeing from the clutches of the power of sin.
And Christ, being the beginning and the end reminds me of the passage "He who has started a good work in you will complete it."
So, was this woman saved from this point on? Well, if we take the above passage as true, that God completes what He begins, than yes, she was, and would continue to be saved.
If we permit ourselves to look at Jesus proclamation "Go and sin no more" not so much as a warning (which is how it sounds/ feels to many people), but rather as a liberation, a freeing from the bondage of sin, there may be room for a fresh understanding of what actually transpired in and for that very much afraid woman,.. who thought for sure that she was going to be killed.
And instead, she passed over from death unto Life. |
Chris
Registered user
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1679
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - 11:48 am: | |
While I realize I'm going off topic here, this seems like a good spot to comment a bit on solid hermeneutics.
1. There are only a very few disputed passages included in modern translations and they are usually marked as doubtful in the textual notes. We should be a bit tentative in formulating dogmatic theology from one of these passages.
John 7:53 - 8:11 (the woman caught in adultery) does not appear in any of the earliest, most reliable, Greek manuscripts. The note in your Bible probably states this. It was probably added later by a copyist, but could still reflect an accurate oral tradition. We just don't know so this probably isn't the best place to stake our flag on a doctrinal point.
2. In looking at ANY passage, the idea is to determine the main exegetical point. You do this by determining a unit of thought, coming up with a subject that asks a question (who, what, why, where, how), and a complement that answers the question. When put together it forms the exegetical point. There should be one exegetical point to each unit of thought.
The subject of this passage is *NOT* "When was the woman saved?" So if the we then come up with a complement to answer a question that was not addressed, we're barking up the wrong exegetical tree.
I would suggest the exegetical point is something closer to:
Subject: Who is qualified to condemn a sinner?
Complement: He who is without sin.
Exegetical Idea: Only He who is without sin is qualified to condemn a sinner.
The next steps would be to determine the theological point and practical application of the exegetical idea (which seem pretty evident here). If we get much past this, we're just speculating or worse, adding meanings to the text that aren't there. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 13411
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 15, 2012 - 10:07 pm: | |
Thanks, Chris. Very well-explained.
Colleen |
|
