And then Adam sinned, according to the will of God no doubt, and that was good too? Correct? It was so "good" that God had to sacrifice Himself on the Cross to repay that decision?
God then decided to drown the wicked men, made wicked by His will, no doubt, according to your theology, and you call that "good?"
God is Love, and love is kind (cf 1 Cor 13:4). The "fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness." [Gal 5:22]
A vengeful and angry God that drowns His own creation is kind? Especially, if we consider your theology to proclaim that even our wickedness is strict obedience to God's will?
Your example of saying "I do this our of love," and kissing your wife as you jump off a bridge is not what Christ did for us. Your jumping off a bridge, for her, would be related only if she was in mortal danger with no other way of being saved. Yes, then your sacrifice would be meaningful and would reflect your love for her -- and could not be considered a "suicide."
Jo, you stated our beliefs very well, thank you.
Well, thank you very much!
Brother in Christ
In the sense that what God ordained happened, yes, it was good. God also ordained that He would sacrifice Himself on the cross, and so in the same sense, that was good. God could have ordered the universe in any way He chose, but He chose this one, for His own reasons. I believe this rather than believe that it was man who chose to kill God against His will. I don't give man that much "credit" in terms of ability.
God then decided to drown the wicked men, made wicked by His will, no doubt, according to your theology, and you call that "good?" ... A vengeful and angry God that drowns His own creation is kind? Especially, if we consider your theology to proclaim that even our wickedness is strict obedience to God's will?
Do you believe that the story of the flood is a fable? Or, do you believe that the flood happened, but God didn't cause it because that would make Him vengeful and angry? I believe that the flood actually did happen, that God directly caused it, and therefore, it was good and just.
Your example of saying "I do this out of love," and kissing your wife as you jump off a bridge is not what Christ did for us. Your jumping off a bridge, for her, would be related only if she was in mortal danger with no other way of being saved. Yes, then your sacrifice would be meaningful and would reflect your love for her -- and could not be considered a "suicide."
Yes, indeed. You are 100% right, here. In my example, it would have been suicide for me because it was unnecessary. Jo Kus said, in effect, that it was unnecessary that Christ die on the cross, (that He could have saved us in some other way), but that He did it anyway out of love for us. I was trying to show why I disagree with that. My point was that SINCE Christ did die on the cross, that it MUST have been necessary to save us.