I found it to be informative, correct, and inspirational. At the same time I want to demonstrate some fairness by saying Mahaney overstepped when he said, "I believe all attributes of God need to be understood in light of the holiness of God. And that the starting point for understanding any attribute of God is the holiness of God. So I don't believe we can just isolate mercy and love and faithfulness on their own. I believe it's a holy mercy. I believe it's a holy love. I believe it's a holy faithfulness. I don't believe we can understand who we are apart from the holiness of God. And I believe the more we understand God's holiness and the more we understand our sinfulness, the more we appreciate the grace and the mercy of God."
I agree with (and love) every aspect of the above except the base premise that holiness (substitute love or any other attribute) should not be singled out above the others. The point that Mahaney makes regarding the need to understand God's attributes in light of holiness could be said for each of His attributes. It is impossible to attain a clearer understanding of God if not considering who He is in light of all He is. As with Mahaney, "I don't believe we can just isolate mercy and love and faithfulness on their own" but nor can we isolate holiness.
That caveat aside, this is a wonderful lesson. He speaks to individuals who are unable to grasp the grace of God but can become secure in the love of God by helping to understand the holiness of God. We can only understand the depth of the grace and of the love of God to the degree that we understand the holiness of God.
I particularly appreciated his comment regarding those that see the meanness of God in the Old Testament but a loving God in the New ... I have some close friends struggling with this very point. Some, as Mahaney notes, have a distorted view seeing Jesus as the friend/lover restraining the judgement of the angry Father.
Alright, enough note taking ... sit back and enjoy.
Warnock extracted the following as Mahaney spoke about God's punishment of Adam.
I don't in any way believe that that was too harsh. He was warned. God made every provision ... When you sin, you forfeit any claim you had to human existence, because the purpose of his life and Eve's life, and our lives was to represent the holiness of God. I don't believe it's unjust for God to take away the gift of life that he gave freely if it wasn't used for the purpose for which he gave it. Because when we sin, what we are saying is—we are not just making a mistake—we are saying no to God's law; we are saying your law is not good; we're saying—God, your law does not cut it, I'm not under your authority; my judgment is superior to yours; I'm defying and opposing you, who in reality I owe everything to.
The amazing thing is not that God has judged people in the Bible; it is that God has not judged everybody.
I have seen some people teach on holiness and they almost seemed happy some people were going to hell.
God does not delight in sending people to hell ... His judgment is not like our temper that flares up in an instant.
As soon as that apple hit Adam's lips and Eve's lips, they should have been wasted immediately, but God was merciful . . . justice was delayed so that grace might enter history.
The issue is not why does God punish sin, but why does he permit the ongoing rebellion of man?
No comments:
Post a Comment