I don't think that Scriptures give thorough answers to these questions but we can understand some things as true.
God is the only one who has it in His nature to remain sinless forever.
The angels had it in their nature to be able to sin.
God elected the majority of the angels to remain sinless forever.
He allowed non-elect angels to rebel against Him into continual opposition to Him forever.
If God had not acted in election of the angels, all of the angels could have chosen to follow Satan. God's sovereign will, power, and grace keeps these elect angels from ever sinning. It is not of themselves, but is a choice and action of God upon them to preserve them from ever sinning.
Some may object to attributing God's grace to angels because we tend to think of grace only being given to humans who are sinful. But grace is unmerited favor. In the case of the angels. They did not in themselves merit to be elected to be kept sinless, but God favored them to remain so according to the plan of creation determined prior to creation within the Godhead.
The angels do not receive any form of redemption from sin, whether elect or fallen. The elect are given the joy of never experiencing sin. The fallen are never given grace to be redeemed from their freely chosen sin. How different this is from humanity.
God, in His eternally perfect wisdom chose this to be for the heavenly hosts just as He chose what He will to be for humanity. These choices are different, but both are equally good and just.
So, what freedom of choice did the angels have? They were free to choose according to their nature as creatures under the sovereignty of God. At the time of the rebellion of the angels, each angel chose whether to sin or to obey. But God graced some to stay holy and did not grace the others with the same grace. But their choices were true choices ruled by their own desires and highest preferences.
You are correct, Mark 8:28 calls the angels holy. And I meant to give 1 Tim. 5:21 as the verse that calls them elect.
Matt. 25:41 says that God created the lake of fire (hell) for the devil and his angles. In Genesis, it says that God rested from His creating. I believe that all things in the universe were created in Genesis, so God created the lake of fire (hell) at that time.
It is true that cosmic clouds of elements have been producing stars since the beginning of creation, but the process and physics to do this was created by God in the beginning.
I can understand your point concerning interjecting theology upon Scripture is one that is held by some believers who disparage theology because it is not verbatum Scripture. But I will say that most doctrines people hold to are derived from Scripture but are not direct Scriptural quotes. I think it is important for us all to admit that this is true of our own beliefs (which the Bible calls "doctrines").
The Bible is not written in a way that systematically explains the primary doctrines of the Christian faith, but Paul does speak of holding fast to the faith passed down by the apostles to the church, which means that there was a set of doctrines and teachings that expounded upon what is revealed in the New Testament, especially in Paul's epistles and in his preaching to the churches as he visited them on his travels. There was a lot of teaching that occurred by Paul, the apostles, and the pastors as they preached weekly in the churches and these teachings were not preserved for us in the canon of Scripture. But they were equally as authorative as what was written and accepted as God inspired in the letters that became our New Testament. The believers in the times of the apostles would take what they heard preached as being from God just as they did the letters Paul and other apostles wrote.
As far as I'm concerned , the whole Bible is self explanatory if one takes it as a whole and studies it as a whole . The Word , the Bible as we have it , had been preserved by God Himself for our benefit . Jesus warns us against cunningly devised fables and false doctrines and we must , absolutely must trust , that the Word as it is preserved in the Bible by God Himself , is all we need to know .
For sure , there is no harm in speculation but even that must , must be based on scripture itself .
The Bible was written by God , everything else was written by humans , fallible , sinful , humans who have their own imaginations and agendas .
I respect your view. I do think that the Scriptures are our rule and guide for understanding God's revelation to humanity. The reality is that everyone who reads and studies Scripture formulates what is understood whether internally or spoken out.
According to your view, in the strictest sense, there is no need to be taught by a pastor or teacher because they expound on the Scriptures and relay their understanding of what Scripture teaches. Your viewpoint would exclude any discussion between believers of what Scripture means because only Scripture could be quoted without dialogue. I doubt that you think this, but, to be consistent, by criticizing that I do speak about what I understand from Scriptures, by necessity, you would have to exclude all other speaking or writing out of how one understands Scripture.
I welcome your reply, but I do not wish to get into a protracted discussion on this matter with you or jesusgirl87 because it is a matter of differing viewpoints on how we are to utilize Scripture that cannot be resolved, since I think that the view you and Jesusgirl have expressed is quite flawed and is one that neither you nor Jesusgirl applies to themselves, as I have read comments from both of you that expresses how you understand Scripture as I have done, which is inconsistent with what you say as your view in your post to me responding to what I have posted.
You are correct, Mark 8:28 calls the angels holy. And I meant to give 1 Tim. 5:21 as the verse that calls them elect.
Matt. 25:41 says that God created the lake of fire (hell) for the devil and his angles. In Genesis, it says that God rested from His creating. I believe that all things in the universe were created in Genesis, so God created the lake of fire (hell) at that time.
It is true that cosmic clouds of elements have been producing stars since the beginning of creation, but the process and physics to do this was created by God in the beginning.
I can understand your point concerning interjecting theology upon Scripture is one that is held by some believers who disparage theology because it is not verbatum Scripture. But I will say that most doctrines people hold to are derived from Scripture but are not direct Scriptural quotes. I think it is important for us all to admit that this is true of our own beliefs (which the Bible calls "doctrines").
The Bible is not written in a way that systematically explains the primary doctrines of the Christian faith, but Paul does speak of holding fast to the faith passed down by the apostles to the church, which means that there was a set of doctrines and teachings that expounded upon what is revealed in the New Testament, especially in Paul's epistles and in his preaching to the churches as he visited them on his travels. There was a lot of teaching that occurred by Paul, the apostles, and the pastors as they preached weekly in the churches and these teachings were not preserved for us in the canon of Scripture. But they were equally as authorative as what was written and accepted as God inspired in the letters that became our New Testament. The believers in the times of the apostles would take what they heard preached as being from God just as they did the letters Paul and other apostles wrote.
Hi Gigi, do you have Scripture and verse for that? Also the fact that the angels that rebelled and those that did not, Choose freely to do so. They were never fallen under a Curse as mankind. Inclined to sin but not incapable of choosing not to. The Bible describes the Lord as referring to Lucifer as perfect Until iniquity was found in him Ezekiel 28:15. The Lord commands all men everywhere to repent Acts 17:30. If this were not possible on Calvinisms view than it would make God Almighty seem pretty evil, demanding something of His creation that His creation (Man) can not do, because he did not Elect them to do so.
I was meaning to get to Scripture verses about the angels tonight, so I am glad you asked.
The sinless angels are called "Elect" and "holy" in Scripture (Mk.8:38; 1 Tim 5:4 for example)
To be elected is to be chosen or selected by the will of God/ To be holy is to be set apart by God. Before creation God did elect the angels who would not sin and determined to set them apart for Himself to be sinless forever. Elect angels and believers are recipients of God's grace (unmerited favor) and their election is solely God's sovereign choice. (Rom. (9 speaks of this).
The angels were all made good and sinless, but God made them moral creatures and therefore, each were able to freely choose to obey or sin even though God selected some to receive grace to not sin.
In Matthew 25:41 Jesus said that the lake of fire was prepared by God for Satan and his angels at creation. This tells us that these angelic beings were not elected to receive God's favor to remain sinless forever and that there is no redemption offered for any sinful angels.
I hope this helps to answer your request. Was there other parts of my post that you question and would like me to further explain with Scripture? I would be happy to address any of your concerns.
Oh yes sorry and in Mt.25:41, no where in that verse does it say "at creation" Hell was created. Again I do think that it is a mistake to read a theology into the text that is not there. And that should speak volumes also in that verse that Hell was Not created for Man it was Created for the Devil and His angels...
Hello Gigi, thank you for your time and reply! While I do appreciate the time you took to write all that down, it really didn't answer my question. It gave me a better look at where you are coming from. Thank you for that. And just looking back to your Scriptures you mentioned Mk. 8:38, that just says "Holy" angels. Not"Elect" angels. The word Holy it's self can have a plethora of different meaning but in that sense in the context I believe it is saying they are separate unto God for His use, as Israel was as a nation " the Elect" of God but many of them died in rebellion! Jesus was Called the "Elect" of the Father in Isaiah 42:1. I'm sure we would both definitely agree Jesus did not have to be saved! I think that it is a mistake to take these words and put a whole theology behind them that undermins the majority of the Bible. And I'm not sure what you meant by 1 Tm. 5:4 that is talking about widows. Maybe you meant a different Scripture. No worries. How many points of T.U.L.I.P. do you agree with, just curious?
I meant to say that someone expressing their understanding of Scripture is not to be judged as a wrong thing to do. Expressing one's ideas should not be seen as a wrong or sinful. We are to do this in hopes of building one another up IN THE FAITH, which is the body of beliefs, teachings, and doctrines taught by the apostles, evangelists, and church leaders of the early church that was EXPECTED to be delivered to the believers as a matter of common acceptance.
Hello Gigi, let me apologize if I did come off rude or as attacking you, I in no means meant to do so!! That being said, I do still stick to what I posted. I feel like I am asking legitimate questions based on what you said in my view of the Light of Scriptures. Clearly we can both see where one another lies on the side of Grace and will... I do think we can both agree on who Jesus is, what He has done, His Blood, the Power of it and Faith Alone for Salvation. But I could be wrong I'm not sure... Like I said I might be guilty I have been personally dealing with someone close to me falling into this Forgive me, False doctrine and it has a very very sore spot for me right now. I have been dealing with it every day for almost a year. So please accept my apologies. I do not come at this half hearted or ignorant. I have immersed myself in this for a long time... So I do have a very knowledgeable und6of the subject. I will come away unconvinced of the opposition every time.
I accept your apology and I do appreciate that you have presented your viewpoint here honestly.
It seems that your main objection is to Calvinism. I am not touting that here, but addressing what I learn from Scripture on the topics of God's will in comparison to the will of angels and humans. But what I discover in my studies of these topics may or may not align with Calvin or Luther or Augustine or Arminius, but that is not because I am an adherent to any of these people's views as a starting point. I am studying Scripture on this topic and considering prayerfully what is being taught in Scripture on this topic.
So I appreciate it if other people don't put me in TOTAL alignment with any of these people . I do know some of what they taught on these topics but was not raised on any of these people's theology.
Glad we have this understanding. We can pray for one another as the scriptures teach us to do. I appreciate your prayers and will keep you in prayer also.
It is curious to me that you speak derisively about theology. It is the study of God and Scriptural teaching where people expound on the tenets of the Christian faith passed down through the apostles. What is wrong with that, Jesusgirl? Doesn't a pastor do this every time he preaches as the apostles and pastors did in the early church? Doesn't this happen when someone seeks to find explanations to Christian teachings encountered in the Bible?
I am so glad there have been so many teachers, preachers, and people using their spiritual gifts to help people better understand Scripture, This is part of what the offices of preacher, evangelist, apostle, teacher, are to do.
Jesusgirl, you can certainly examine what I say by what is revealed in Scripture. I would want anyone to do that. But to simply criticize me for explaining what I understand from Scripture is not acceptable to me. This forum is full of people who explain their understanding of the teachings of Scripture and I am glad that people do this. Whenever someone does this, they are speaking theologically. Are saying that people should not share what they are learning from Scripture and only quote Scripture verbatum here? I doubt that you think this should be so.
It seems to me that you came against me for expressing my ideas of what I understand from Scriptural study because you do not agree with what I have said. If I explained my understanding of Scripture that you agree with I doubt that you would have criticized my posting or accused me of "using theology".
So let us agree to be understanding and not judge someone for expressing their understanding of Scripture. Such expression should be judged as a wrong action, but we should speak about WHAT is being said as to whether it aligns with Scripture or not.
As to the TULIP question, I am not wanting to go there in this discussion. I am intending to discuss a number of concepts that are aspects of Christian thought and teaching.
It is curious to me that you speak derisively about theology. It is the study of God and Scriptural teaching where people expound on the tenets of the Christian faith passed down through the apostles. What is wrong with that, Jesusgirl? Doesn't a pastor do this every time he preaches as the apostles and pastors did in the early church? Doesn't this happen when someone seeks to find explanations to Christian teachings encountered in the Bible?
I am so glad there have been so many teachers, preachers, and people using their spiritual gifts to help people better understand Scripture, This is part of what the offices of preacher, evangelist, apostle, teacher, are to do.
Jesusgirl, you can certainly examine what I say by what is revealed in Scripture. I would want anyone to do that. But to simply criticize me for explaining what I understand from Scripture is not acceptable to me. This forum is full of people who explain their understanding of the teachings of Scripture and I am glad that people do this. Whenever someone does this, they are speaking theologically. Are saying that people should not share what they are learning from Scripture and only quote Scripture verbatum here? I doubt that you think this should be so.
It seems to me that you came against me for expressing my ideas of what I understand from Scriptural study because you do not agree with what I have said. If I explained my understanding of Scripture that you agree with I doubt that you would have criticized my posting or accused me of "using theology".
So let us agree to be understanding and not judge someone for expressing their understanding of Scripture. Such expression should be judged as a wrong action, but we should speak about WHAT is being said as to whether it aligns with Scripture or not.
As to the TULIP question, I am not wanting to go there in this discussion. I am intending to discuss a number of concepts that are aspects of Christian thought and teaching.
I don't think that Scriptures give thorough answers to these questions but we can understand some things as true.
God is the only one who has it in His nature to remain sinless forever.
The angels had it in their nature to be able to sin.
God elected the majority of the angels to remain sinless forever.
He allowed non-elect angels to rebel against Him into continual opposition to Him forever.
If God had not acted in election of the angels, all of the angels could have chosen to follow Satan. God's sovereign will, power, and grace keeps these elect angels from ever sinning. It is not of themselves, but is a choice and action of God upon them to preserve them from ever sinning.
Some may object to attributing God's grace to angels because we tend to think of grace only being given to humans who are sinful. But grace is unmerited favor. In the case of the angels. They did not in themselves merit to be elected to be kept sinless, but God favored them to remain so according to the plan of creation determined prior to creation within the Godhead.
The angels do not receive any form of redemption from sin, whether elect or fallen. The elect are given the joy of never experiencing sin. The fallen are never given grace to be redeemed from their freely chosen sin. How different this is from humanity.
God, in His eternally perfect wisdom chose this to be for the heavenly hosts just as He chose what He will to be for humanity. These choices are different, but both are equally good and just.
So, what freedom of choice did the angels have? They were free to choose according to their nature as creatures under the sovereignty of God. At the time of the rebellion of the angels, each angel chose whether to sin or to obey. But God graced some to stay holy and did not grace the others with the same grace. But their choices were true choices ruled by their own desires and highest preferences.
You are correct, Mark 8:28 calls the angels holy. And I meant to give 1 Tim. 5:21 as the verse that calls them elect.
Matt. 25:41 says that God created the lake of fire (hell) for the devil and his angles. In Genesis, it says that God rested from His creating. I believe that all things in the universe were created in Genesis, so God created the lake of fire (hell) at that time.
It is true that cosmic clouds of elements have been producing stars since the beginning of creation, but the process and physics to do this was created by God in the beginning.
I can understand your point concerning interjecting theology upon Scripture is one that is held by some believers who disparage theology because it is not verbatum Scripture. But I will say that most doctrines people hold to are derived from Scripture but are not direct Scriptural quotes. I think it is important for us all to admit that this is true of our own beliefs (which the Bible calls "doctrines").
The Bible is not written in a way that systematically explains the primary doctrines of the Christian faith, but Paul does speak of holding fast to the faith passed down by the apostles to the church, which means that there was a set of doctrines and teachings that expounded upon what is revealed in the New Testament, especially in Paul's epistles and in his preaching to the churches as he visited them on his travels. There was a lot of teaching that occurred by Paul, the apostles, and the pastors as they preached weekly in the churches and these teachings were not preserved for us in the canon of Scripture. But they were equally as authorative as what was written and accepted as God inspired in the letters that became our New Testament. The believers in the times of the apostles would take what they heard preached as being from God just as they did the letters Paul and other apostles wrote.
See pt. 2
For sure , there is no harm in speculation but even that must , must be based on scripture itself .
The Bible was written by God , everything else was written by humans , fallible , sinful , humans who have their own imaginations and agendas .
I respect your view. I do think that the Scriptures are our rule and guide for understanding God's revelation to humanity. The reality is that everyone who reads and studies Scripture formulates what is understood whether internally or spoken out.
According to your view, in the strictest sense, there is no need to be taught by a pastor or teacher because they expound on the Scriptures and relay their understanding of what Scripture teaches. Your viewpoint would exclude any discussion between believers of what Scripture means because only Scripture could be quoted without dialogue. I doubt that you think this, but, to be consistent, by criticizing that I do speak about what I understand from Scriptures, by necessity, you would have to exclude all other speaking or writing out of how one understands Scripture.
I welcome your reply, but I do not wish to get into a protracted discussion on this matter with you or jesusgirl87 because it is a matter of differing viewpoints on how we are to utilize Scripture that cannot be resolved, since I think that the view you and Jesusgirl have expressed is quite flawed and is one that neither you nor Jesusgirl applies to themselves, as I have read comments from both of you that expresses how you understand Scripture as I have done, which is inconsistent with what you say as your view in your post to me responding to what I have posted.
I look forward to reading your interpretations of Scripture in the future. It helps us to better understand one another.
You are correct, Mark 8:28 calls the angels holy. And I meant to give 1 Tim. 5:21 as the verse that calls them elect.
Matt. 25:41 says that God created the lake of fire (hell) for the devil and his angles. In Genesis, it says that God rested from His creating. I believe that all things in the universe were created in Genesis, so God created the lake of fire (hell) at that time.
It is true that cosmic clouds of elements have been producing stars since the beginning of creation, but the process and physics to do this was created by God in the beginning.
I can understand your point concerning interjecting theology upon Scripture is one that is held by some believers who disparage theology because it is not verbatum Scripture. But I will say that most doctrines people hold to are derived from Scripture but are not direct Scriptural quotes. I think it is important for us all to admit that this is true of our own beliefs (which the Bible calls "doctrines").
The Bible is not written in a way that systematically explains the primary doctrines of the Christian faith, but Paul does speak of holding fast to the faith passed down by the apostles to the church, which means that there was a set of doctrines and teachings that expounded upon what is revealed in the New Testament, especially in Paul's epistles and in his preaching to the churches as he visited them on his travels. There was a lot of teaching that occurred by Paul, the apostles, and the pastors as they preached weekly in the churches and these teachings were not preserved for us in the canon of Scripture. But they were equally as authorative as what was written and accepted as God inspired in the letters that became our New Testament. The believers in the times of the apostles would take what they heard preached as being from God just as they did the letters Paul and other apostles wrote.
See pt. 2
I was meaning to get to Scripture verses about the angels tonight, so I am glad you asked.
The sinless angels are called "Elect" and "holy" in Scripture (Mk.8:38; 1 Tim 5:4 for example)
To be elected is to be chosen or selected by the will of God/ To be holy is to be set apart by God. Before creation God did elect the angels who would not sin and determined to set them apart for Himself to be sinless forever. Elect angels and believers are recipients of God's grace (unmerited favor) and their election is solely God's sovereign choice. (Rom. (9 speaks of this).
The angels were all made good and sinless, but God made them moral creatures and therefore, each were able to freely choose to obey or sin even though God selected some to receive grace to not sin.
In Matthew 25:41 Jesus said that the lake of fire was prepared by God for Satan and his angels at creation. This tells us that these angelic beings were not elected to receive God's favor to remain sinless forever and that there is no redemption offered for any sinful angels.
I hope this helps to answer your request. Was there other parts of my post that you question and would like me to further explain with Scripture? I would be happy to address any of your concerns.
I meant to say that someone expressing their understanding of Scripture is not to be judged as a wrong thing to do. Expressing one's ideas should not be seen as a wrong or sinful. We are to do this in hopes of building one another up IN THE FAITH, which is the body of beliefs, teachings, and doctrines taught by the apostles, evangelists, and church leaders of the early church that was EXPECTED to be delivered to the believers as a matter of common acceptance.
Hope to hear from you soon.
I accept your apology and I do appreciate that you have presented your viewpoint here honestly.
It seems that your main objection is to Calvinism. I am not touting that here, but addressing what I learn from Scripture on the topics of God's will in comparison to the will of angels and humans. But what I discover in my studies of these topics may or may not align with Calvin or Luther or Augustine or Arminius, but that is not because I am an adherent to any of these people's views as a starting point. I am studying Scripture on this topic and considering prayerfully what is being taught in Scripture on this topic.
So I appreciate it if other people don't put me in TOTAL alignment with any of these people . I do know some of what they taught on these topics but was not raised on any of these people's theology.
Pt. 2
It is curious to me that you speak derisively about theology. It is the study of God and Scriptural teaching where people expound on the tenets of the Christian faith passed down through the apostles. What is wrong with that, Jesusgirl? Doesn't a pastor do this every time he preaches as the apostles and pastors did in the early church? Doesn't this happen when someone seeks to find explanations to Christian teachings encountered in the Bible?
I am so glad there have been so many teachers, preachers, and people using their spiritual gifts to help people better understand Scripture, This is part of what the offices of preacher, evangelist, apostle, teacher, are to do.
Jesusgirl, you can certainly examine what I say by what is revealed in Scripture. I would want anyone to do that. But to simply criticize me for explaining what I understand from Scripture is not acceptable to me. This forum is full of people who explain their understanding of the teachings of Scripture and I am glad that people do this. Whenever someone does this, they are speaking theologically. Are saying that people should not share what they are learning from Scripture and only quote Scripture verbatum here? I doubt that you think this should be so.
It seems to me that you came against me for expressing my ideas of what I understand from Scriptural study because you do not agree with what I have said. If I explained my understanding of Scripture that you agree with I doubt that you would have criticized my posting or accused me of "using theology".
So let us agree to be understanding and not judge someone for expressing their understanding of Scripture. Such expression should be judged as a wrong action, but we should speak about WHAT is being said as to whether it aligns with Scripture or not.
As to the TULIP question, I am not wanting to go there in this discussion. I am intending to discuss a number of concepts that are aspects of Christian thought and teaching.
Pt. 2
It is curious to me that you speak derisively about theology. It is the study of God and Scriptural teaching where people expound on the tenets of the Christian faith passed down through the apostles. What is wrong with that, Jesusgirl? Doesn't a pastor do this every time he preaches as the apostles and pastors did in the early church? Doesn't this happen when someone seeks to find explanations to Christian teachings encountered in the Bible?
I am so glad there have been so many teachers, preachers, and people using their spiritual gifts to help people better understand Scripture, This is part of what the offices of preacher, evangelist, apostle, teacher, are to do.
Jesusgirl, you can certainly examine what I say by what is revealed in Scripture. I would want anyone to do that. But to simply criticize me for explaining what I understand from Scripture is not acceptable to me. This forum is full of people who explain their understanding of the teachings of Scripture and I am glad that people do this. Whenever someone does this, they are speaking theologically. Are saying that people should not share what they are learning from Scripture and only quote Scripture verbatum here? I doubt that you think this should be so.
It seems to me that you came against me for expressing my ideas of what I understand from Scriptural study because you do not agree with what I have said. If I explained my understanding of Scripture that you agree with I doubt that you would have criticized my posting or accused me of "using theology".
So let us agree to be understanding and not judge someone for expressing their understanding of Scripture. Such expression should be judged as a wrong action, but we should speak about WHAT is being said as to whether it aligns with Scripture or not.
As to the TULIP question, I am not wanting to go there in this discussion. I am intending to discuss a number of concepts that are aspects of Christian thought and teaching.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Please Sign In or Register to post comments...
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?