It can be used for outrageous or unsubstantiated claims stated as a matter of fact. Thus "He said he was God" would warrant a [sic] after the word "God."
You made an absolute statement "testing helps to sanctify us..." actually warrants a double [sic], one for making it a matter-of-fact when it is not, and two for saying that it merely "helps" rather than accomplishes. If testing is from God, it is only "helping" or is it actually achieving the desired effect?
If you already have faith and are irreversibly saved by grace, what doth testing do, pray tell?
Kosta: Moreover, many an individual is tested to his detriment, and does not necessarily "help" sanctify.
FK: Really? When does that ever happen from God? God never tests us to our ultimate harm, He only tests us to our ultimate good That's a politically correct answer, FK, but unfortunately it is false. The OT God you believe in does harm people. It's just that if we go through a tribulation and recover, we call it "being tested," and if we don't make it, we call it "tempted."
One being tested "a lot" in no way means he is automatically "more sanctified" than one who is tested less. It doesn't match up like that. Everyone's individual levels of the various methods of sanctification are all over the place.
And how do you know that?
I want to live on this earth EXACTLY as long as God wants me to, no more.
Why, aren't you lucky that's exactly what you want, given that you don't have any choice!
When my mission is completed He will call me home and I will accept that too, (assuming I am reasonably sure it is my time).
Yeah, make sure you "verify" that it agrees with you!
How can you possibly know what did or did not "help" Abraham??? IMMEDIATELY after the Lord had provided, the angel said this...Gen 22:15-18 : 15 "I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars...
But Abraham's deed was a given; so was his faith, although faith here was not the "deed"; none of it was any of Abraham's doing (if we are to follow Reformed theology). Yet God makes it sound as if he was "rewarding" Abraham for what Abraham did when there was no question if Abraham would do what was predestined; it was an accomplished act before it even happened.
My comment was meant to be akin to "washing the windshield helps make a car clean". We view sanctification as a lifelong process. Testing helps move that process forward. So does prayer (washing the doors), and so does good works(washing the trunk), etc. .............. Being sanctified brings us closer in our relationship to God, a thing God says He wants for us during our time here on earth. Many of the same things you count for theosis we would count for sanctification, so we should agree that they are worthwhile.
FK: Really? When does that ever happen from God? God never tests us to our ultimate harm, He only tests us to our ultimate good.
That's a politically correct answer, FK, but unfortunately it is false. The OT God you believe in does harm people.
When God executed His justice in the OT, it wasn't a test! :) Totally different subject.
It's just that if we go through a tribulation and recover, we call it "being tested," and if we don't make it, we call it "tempted."
I don't see it that way. I will grant that sometimes it can be difficult to discern which is which, but it is NOT outcome determined. For example, if my cable scrambled and I suddenly had the naked channel for free, my best guess is that it would be a temptation. However, if I got sick, and my choices were to either seek God for healing or curse Him for my sickness, then I would guess that to be a test.
In addition, my view is that this is complicated somewhat by the personal nature of tests and temptations. For example, if the naked channel happened to be the gay naked channel, then it really wouldn't be a temptation to me. :) So, theoretically, I do think that the same thing could be a test for one and a temptation for another. I just hold that it is not outcome determined.
FK: "One being tested "a lot" in no way means he is automatically "more sanctified" than one who is tested less. It doesn't match up like that. Everyone's individual levels of the various methods of sanctification are all over the place."
And how do you know that?
Because God uses more than one method to sanctify. Wouldn't you agree that theosis is achieved by various means? It's the same thing. So, God chooses to concentrate on Bible study for some, prayer for others, testing for still others, and there is a mix for everyone. There is no way to quantify that if I am tested more than the next guy, that therefore I am more sanctified than him. Who knows how the other guy has been sanctified by God? I "know" this by simple observation of what is.
FK: "I want to live on this earth EXACTLY as long as God wants me to, no more."
Why, aren't you lucky that's exactly what you want, given that you don't have any choice!
All it means is that I accept the order of the universe as God has put it forth. What could be wrong with that? :)