From: BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Efficient & Logical. (Was Re: That P' word again)
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:00:34 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

>Please, brother, do not entwine yourself in this trap.  What makes something
>logical, or what makes something efficient?  Let me state it another way:
>Are LOGIC and EFFICIENCY things God has to bow down to?  If so, then they
>are God's god, and why should we bow to him when we could bow to them?

Certainly God bows to nothing outside of himself.  What I am saying is that
God by his very nature cannot do illogical or inefficient things.  I don't
think it is demeaning to the nature of God to say that God cannot do an
imperfect thing.

> Should we abandon solar energy alternatives because they are less than 20%
> efficient?  No, Effectual is more important than Efficient.

But if we were to find an energy source with the same advantages as solar
energy but was 40% efficient we would abandon solar energy. An efficient
thing is judged superior to an inefficient thing, and a more efficient thing
is judged superior to a less efficient thing.  I'm saying that preaching
is inefficient (superfluous, or what-have-you) if individual salvation
has already been decided.  I don't believe God commands us to do
meaningless things.

> The other problem is the distinction between logical precedence and temporal
> precedence.  What I mean is that things that happen in eternity are not
> bound by the same rules as things in time.  There is no time-line in
> eternity, and we are talking about eternal things.  If A must precede B
> logically, does that mean that A must happen first, in time?

I am talking about whether evangelization has any meaning if God has
already decided who will be saved or lost.  I submit it doesn't.
As for logical vs. temporal precdence and eternity vs time I couldn't
agree more.

> For example, the logical order of some of the major events in salvation is:

> 1.  Foreordination
> 2.  Calling
> 3.  Regeneration
> 4.  Faith/Repentance
> 5.  Confession
> 6.  Perseverance/Sanctification
> 7.  Glorification.

> This follows the scriptures, e.g., see Romans 10, and shows the following
> chain of events.  God determines who will be saved.  He calls them, and in
> the calling, the dead bones come to life (regeneration, new birth).  The
> freshly-born hears & believes that word of salvation and repents from sin,
> confessing Christ as savior/lord.  He/she perseveres in the good works/fruit
> of that salvation until the end, leading a life of sanctification which
> leads to Glorification.

No, the correct order is that God foreknew who he would predestine
(ala ROM 8:29-30).  He knows who will respond to the offer of salvation
so he predestines, justifies, etc.  And before someone suggests that the
word for foreknow is used in the sense of "Adam knew his wife" let me
hastily add that the word as far as I have been able to determine is
never used in that sense by Paul anywhere else in the New Testament.

> That is logical.  But what do we experience in time?  Some of us felt that
> our faith caused us to be reborn.  Others experienced it differently.

What does experience have to do with it?  There are just to many variables
in experience for it to be a reliable indicator of for much of anything.


Brian