Very good. This is all correct. :)
Once dehumanized, the destruction of God's refuse in the Old Testament genocides become God's "justice."
Oh well, it was nice while it lasted. :) BECAUSE God is personal, ALL humans are above the rest of God's creation, even the reprobate. ALL humans have significance.
Another way of looking at that is that what the OT God did to Abraham was cruel and sadistic. God would have known Abraham's faith and that Abraham's love for God was stronger than for his son. God did not have to test Abraham to know that.
One possibility is that Abraham didn't know it, and this is how he found out. He obviously grew spiritually as a result of this experience. How many of us can say with absolute certainty what we would do in his sandals then? I believe I have a strong faith, but I can't say I KNOW what I would do in THAT situation. In addition, God knew that this story would be recorded as a testament to faith for all future believers of all time. This story has certainly helped me with my faith.
FK: ......... God leading the Jews out of Egypt in response to their prayers.
From the Reformed point of view, that is an oxymoron. The Reformed can't say that prayers change what God predestined. If the prayers were predestined, then the Jews prayed not because they wanted to but because they had to. And God did not "respond" to their prayers, but simply did what His "plan" envisions would happen, since obviously even God is [held?] captive by His own "plan."
This is fairly close, but not spot on. The prayers were ordained, BUT that does not mean they were not genuine and heart felt when they were made. Of course they were. They absolutely did look to God for help. Also, God is not held "captive" by anything. A perfect God makes a perfect plan and then executes it perfectly. Therefore, there is no need for deviation and no forcing. If God DID deviate from His plan, or even want to, then He wouldn't be God. He would be something else.
FK: ... God testing the mettle of His son Job, and then MORE than fully restoring him...
God had no reason to test Job. God would know what's in Job's heart. God was making a bet with Satan, who said he could make Job curse God. What I see in all this is Zeus, not Christ, not even a foreshadow of Christ. What I see is a deity that acts like a man would, a God made in man's image.
You have said something like this a few times. Is it the case that if it doesn't make sense to YOU that the OT account must be false? It sure seems that way. Of course God did not "need" to test Job, but He obviously wanted to for His reasons alone. I do not question those reasons, whatever they were.
Christ had a very select group of followers, a dozen of men and a few women, that you could say had any personal interaction with Him, none of which was a friendship of any kind, but a strict relationship. He told them what, when and where to do, where not to do, where to go, where not to go, how to pray, etc., etc.
Wow! :) I totally disagree. My vision of those times is that Jesus was the leader of a brotherhood of followers. I think they shared stories with each other, laughed together, cried together, and shared everything together. What do you think they talked about as they shared thousands of meals together, the weather? :) No, they shared as any family would. Christ loved and treated His disciples as His spiritual children, ..... because ...... they WERE His children.
When we read the NT, we do not get the impression that Christ was a standoffish, elitist, ruler-type. He was humble and He was caring for His flock. He LOVED them in a familial way. Your description does not fit the text at all. As just one example of dozens, in a "strict relationship", as you term it, would Christ have washed the feet of the disciples?
***Another way of looking at that is that what the OT God did to Abraham was cruel and sadistic. God would have known Abraham’s faith and that Abraham’s love for God was stronger than for his son. God did not have to test Abraham to know that.
One possibility is that Abraham didn’t know it, and this is how he found out. He obviously grew spiritually as a result of this experience. How many of us can say with absolute certainty what we would do in his sandals then? I believe I have a strong faith, but I can’t say I KNOW what I would do in THAT situation. In addition, God knew that this story would be recorded as a testament to faith for all future believers of all time. This story has certainly helped me with my faith.***
If I may, Abrahams faith was not tested so that GOD would know his faith, but that ABRAHAM would realize it. Testing usually has the effect of causing us to realize where we are strong or weak, something that God already knew.
Oh, plueeeese, FK, that is such a banal answer. It is also an oxymoron, with all due respect. If God ordained some people with the specific purpose for them to go to hell eternally, it is difficult to argue that He made them in imago dei (image of God)! God did not make them in His image so they can be evil! For it is precisely imago dei that sets humans apart from other living beings, i.e. being higher—"above the rest."
[Going by the Reformed logic] If the reprobate are creatures rejected by God before they even existed, the ones He predestined to be evil, they could not possibly be anything even remotely similar to those God considers His children! For they are even lower than animals, for animals are not evil.
Ah, but you will say "we don't know who is saved and who isn't." Even though it is not up to us to judge, is there any doubt in your mind that Hitler was bound for hell? But what if he wasn't? What if he repented before he died? You will say something like "it's God's decision, and I don't question that."
The horrible conclusion we come to, based on Reformed theology, is that God predestined Hitler for salvation before the foundations of the world knowing the evil he would commit (because God predestined it!!!) , and He did that for some "greater good." (what "greater good" came out of Hitler? Did it stop wars and suffering and hunger; did it give us "faith?").
And this brings us to Abraham. Love doesn't use Russian roulette as a teaching tool for appreciation of love. Abraham was predestined according to Reformed theology to believe and to appreciate his faith. Why does it matter if we know or don't know. Our knowledge, as our prayers, as our good works, matter not to God according toy this theology...they are made to look like they do, but in reality all this is pre-choregraphed and cannot change, and it's not done for us but for God's glory alone.
Reformed theology implies that we are actually deceived by God into believing that our prayers are real, when in fact they cannot change anything. So, one must conclude that the Reformed God is a deceiver. Please show me that his is not so.
All I said was that to me the Old Testament God is something more Zeus-like then Christ-like. As far as what makes sense to me, isn't that what you Protestants/Baptists preach and promote? If it is not you that is a measure of your faith, than what is? The Baptist Church? The Reformed "Magisterium?" The official truth? The most popular view? Or is it that which "makes sense" to you regardless how many others agree with you?
You consider yourself a Reformed Baptist. The Reformed in the Baptist community represent only 10% of the members of this community. What makes you a Reformed Baptist if not because Reformed theology for some reason makes sense to you? Do you have a certificate of authenticity somewhere posted in the sky that says "Reformed theology is true?" No, of course not. You are Reformed and Baptist because it makes sense to you.
But, I think that my individualism bothers you only because it disagrees with you, because it doesn't make sense to YOU.
Oh, I am guilty, as charged, that if something makes no sense to me I will question it. John 6:57 makes no sense to me at all! But neither do official commentaries on it; neither the verse itself, given who Jesus is, nor with respect to the context of the whole chapter. Christ says:
"I live because of the Father"
Wow! This is the same Word who was with God in the "beginning" (what beginning?), the same Word who was God?
But someone will say, this is Jesus speaking in His human nature, which is then true. But the Bible tells us that it was not the Father but the Spirit that overshadowed Mary, yet the whole context that precedes this verse talks about life coming from heavenly manna, and that by eating His flesh we shall live.
Jesus never had to eat anything in order to live, so there is no comparison (the eternal Word took on human nature and became man, so if this is about His human nature is is not related to the rest of the chapter.
Jesus made it very clear to His disciples and to everyone else for that matter that He and they are not the same. He always taught them and commanded them.
They never referred to Him in any other way but "Teacher" or "Lord," never by His name. You don't form friendships with someone you are not on a first-name basis but someone you call "Lord." When He spoke, they listened.
They could ask questions and His answers were either examples of good or evil or parables. They were His "groupies," His followers. They are referred to as His disciples (students, pupils), not His family. The only thing the Bible says about Christ's human family is that they thought He was not altogether right in His head.