W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page   Contents Page for Volume  What is New

CHAPTER EIGHT

THE HEADY BYPASS OF TRUTH

Following Man has Multiple Defects,

whether as Grahamist,  Calvinist, Wesleyan

Following the Word of God has Multiple Marvels

Resolving Every Problem for Man
 

THE ERROR IN PRINCIPLE

Paul's prohibition: it is time to disinter this from the framework and fabric of traditional interment, and restore it to the light.

Which prohibition ? It is one of which we have had occasion to speak before,  as in Spiritual Food and Spiritual Drink Ch. 10. It is the one which forbids the use of some one man's name (apostle or not, as for example Paul in this excludes his own name) for designation of a source, centre, basis or separate crowd of followers, in the Church which is founded on Jesus the Christ. You may not say I OF CALVIN. You cannot say, That sums up my position, since only the Bible does this, and division by name is excluded by divine law.

We have looked at that. Features furnished by the great include failures, and some errors abound, even amid marvels on interpretation. It is necessary always to go back to the Bible for characterisation, to the word for formulation and to disdain the use of heirs apparent which so many make for and of themselves or of those to whom they are denoting themselves, or of the systems of the same, even when these are put forward as NAMES by which to be called.

This has led to division in the Church, when entirely unnecessary. Parties, as in politics, can become so self-absorbed in their preferences as to become factitious, mere fighting forces prating this and that and ignoring the other. ALL the word of God MUST be reviewed for the truth as in I Corinthians 2:12-13, for it is all profitable for rebuke and training. It is not that any one text is defective; but it is not the completion of divine statements on a topic, in general, and what is part is to be found in what is whole.

The biblical way to meet difficulties is to examine the Bible thematically, intensively, covering all, as far as may be, and applying all, confidently to see the outcome, whatever tradition (as in the days of the Pharisees - Mark 7:7ff.) may have to say. Christ so treated the devil as in Matthew 4, when he sought to muddle and mess with the word of God for his own purposes, as have so many ever since!

In doctrine, there is nil and null room for invention, nor is there any need even if it seemed called for; for not one problem remains when the word of God is taken entirely to heart, and kept agilely in mind, and brought to mind.

One must love the Lord with all one's mind too! In Christian Biblical Apologetics, in contrasting understanding with misunderstanding, one may of course as authorised (I Peter 3:15, I Corinthians 11:1) also show what harmonious resolutions are available amid all the doctrines from the word of God, just as what irrationalities are bred without it. Such resolutions must be carefully distinguished from doctrine, though in this way, they support it.

A VAST CONFIRMATION

Thus in more recent times, we have had an enormous popularity with many testimonies of conversions, from one, Billy Graham. At his height, thousands milled to his crusades, and at his best, he would emphasise the entire truth of the Bible, the necessity of coming to Christ, and even name enemies such as Islam, Romanism and Communism.Consider this citation from Graham when younger: 
 

"The three greatest menaces faced by orthodox Christianity are Communism, Roman Catholicism and Mohamedanism"  - Graham, 1948 from Plains Baptist Challenger, July 1977,
as noted at

http://www.hissheep.org/catholic/billy_graham_politician_preacher_prophet_heretic.html.

He has been cited as referring his former views to 'playing God' and now he is willing to have an entirely new inclusiveness, going beyond all bounds.

This is cited in a notable conversation with Dr Schuller.

http://www.ondoctrine.com/unquotes/grahb002.htm

Further, in

McCall's Magazine,
"I Can't Play God Anymore"
by James Michael Beam
January 1978:

we find this: "Graham confesses that he has taken a more modest view of his own role in God's plan for man. 'I used to play God, but I can't do that any more. I used to believe that pagans in far-off countries were lost, were going to hell—if they did not have the gospel of Jesus Christ preached to them. I no longer believe that. I believe that there are other ways of recognizing God—through nature for instance and plenty of other ways of saying ''Yes'' to God.' "

THE SCOPE OF THE THING
IN DIVISION, SUPERFICIALITY AND CONTROVERSY

Now the purpose of these considerations is for illustration. In Augustine's case, there were found in my M.A. Thesis on Predestination and Freewill, certain variations on predestination. That however is small compared with this. Here is a noted change in a preacher's doctrine, in such a style that what had formerly, often from the Bible, been presented, is called playing God. Yet how better could you play God than speak in His name and in that of Jesus Christ, while entirely snuffing important principles from His very lips, such as John 14:6!

What makes it even clearer is this, that the specimen of belief from which he now disengages is that it is necessary to come to God through Christ, if you are  to get there. Now there is scope, Graham authority and elevation of the concept of another thing, under the name of the same management, Jesus Christ! It appears to be salvation by impulse, by desire, quite unlike the case of Esau noted in Hebrews 12:17, where one sorry for the results of sin is not equated with one repentant.

It is not impulse which saves, a seeking in the void, the following of an idol, a false religion, a shambles of philosophical postulates in which one can lodge or find an appeal, or an abyss or mount of feeling: all this is self-assessment, if ever there were any. This is Graham talk, and in a certain way, it is playing God just where it is supposedly an abnegation of having done so, a potent source of confusion.

 Graham has found and felt, it seems, a pang of pity, and yielding to his conscience, has decided to invoke new ideas,  contrary to the Bible, and to act as if this were humility, rather than a faithless arrogance,  relative to the Bible. Christ the only Saviour ? not Him alone. Other ways ? LOTS! Some preacher of the word of God is seen in this, perhaps now further off than Balaam was in insisting on changing some point. That prophet was at least  used  to deliver amidst his efforts to force God to change on Israel, a prophecy of some note about the entire future! (Numbers 24:17ff.). It is to be emphasised that Balaam was bailed up to change one point, the divine attitude to Israel, rather like many Palestinians and Moslems today. It is one point at that level (though Islam has very many divergencies that declare spiritual war on Christ^*1). It is for that reason that Obama is far astray in declaring holy, a book making war on Jesus Christ. It is not difficult to see that.

Here Graham is at war with the exclusivist claims of Jesus Christ, based on His BEING DEITY, DEITY SEND BY DEITY SENDER, from the Trinity. It is one point. Often for one point, some will die, as when for example, only on one point  does a bank robber differ from the law, that of not interfering with legal possessions (or such might be the  case). One point often enshrines the whole point (James 2:10 so declares).

HENCE, once more we find the necessity of obedience, in heart and lip and in love and in admiration. You MAY NOT call yourself after changeable man, whether the thing be vast or small; nor after mutable philosophy (Colossians 2:8), the thoughts of your heart in precedence against the statements of divine lips, HIS! Warnings may be multiplied, but these do more than suffice.

You may CONCUR with an item or group of items, BECAUSE they say what the Bible says; but you may not CALL yourself after the name which is that of the one who so cited. Even sound confessions may be lacking in depth or scope. The Westminster Confession is marvellous on this, refusing to have itself used as a standard of reference (Ch. XXXIII, 3), in a way which, ironically, is precisely the opposite of what is often done with it^*2, where it may even be made a criterion. Thus, in an act of rebellious horror, it may be  left IN PRACTICE,  standing as orthodoxy, while by this very fact, the Church concerned is immersed in the opposite.

You may endorse propositions; you may not make them a standard of reference in terms of any name of man, be it group or other. You may AGREE with certain creedal propositions, but as soon as these become individualities, or given direct feature or focus above or before the Bible, you are astray. In particular,  it is forbidden for the name of the propounder to be used. Creeds may have their place if uncontroversial concerning the whole of the Bibloe, but only in practice, as subordinate, and not a standard but a guide or help.

Tradition in general is immersed in danger (Mark 7:7ff.), and to follow it even where by name prohibited seems an arrogance which likewise, appears to be a wonderful way to create divisions. In Bay of Retractable Islands, Mission for the Mainland, numerous dangers in this direction are covered, with endeavour by resolution, to move from historical schisms to biblical centrality.
 

BIBLICAL RESOLUTION PROMINENTLY ON DISPLAY
IN THE BOOK OF THE LORD

What, then,  is needed in response to the pang of pity for those ignorant of the Gospel is precisely as with all other doctrine, since God is Himself far more compassionate than any one of us, and compassion is a beautiful thing, is to search the Bible past tradition, in truth. Whatever one may find is not so much the point, as what is found to be  THERE.

Thus, as shown in numerous volumes on this site ^*3 , God states the principle of His action at this level clearly in Colossians 1:19ff., I Timothy 2, Luke 19:42ff., Isaiah 48:16ff., Ezekiel 33:11ff., in various ways, one of the chief to the point being His determinate desire that all should be reconciled to Himself, and this in terms of the blood of the Cross, so that it is no flicker, even if in the immutable God, whose ways are everlasting, there were one! (as is not the case, cf. James 1:17). Hence there is no need for a frustrated compassion on the part of anyone bearing the name of Jesus Christ follower (THAT name you are assuredly permitted as a distinctive, but you should follow Him!). God has it to perfection allied to all power (cf. Isaiah 14:27). Compassion in Him is unsurpassable,  as expressed in His written word, the Bible.

This being His statement, the first requisite is this, that it be believed. It is a principle affirmed by infinite truth and wisdom. Then one should apply it; for rules are not made for breach, when it comes to God.

We are told that in predestination there is a logical precursor, foreknowledge (Romans 8:29ff.). If you want to employ the concepts of sequence as we have, then God does not act first and then think afterwards, but the other way around.

In this foreknowledge, we learn as in Ephesians 1:4, that people are actually CHOSEN IN CHRIST before time found its first horizons, or dawn its first day, man his first conscious moment, or creation its ordinances.

In what way, then would they be chosen ? in a principled way in terms of divine advice, or in some other way ?

Assuredly, it is in the way which does not preclude the word of the ONLY ONE who KNOWS, that is, God, but takes this as true.

Thus IN foreknowing: what God foreknew was each soul, and in foreknowing and choosing some, the ineradicable principle never missing was this, that it pleased Him to the depth of the blood of the Cross, that is, to the height of the love which it displayed to the world as in John 3:16-18: to do what ? It was this:  to reconcile all.

To assume that this sort of love was not present in the God who IS love (I John 4:7ff.), so that nothing ultimately contradictory of it may be assigned to Him, is merely to take Him as a liar: there is some mitigation in that this may not be intended; but none in the other, that it contradicts a direct divine statement, as found no less in Ezekiel 33:11, and God is no respecter of persons. Here it is, not only that He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that to the very depth of His very being ("As I live..."), and in direct quotation of Himself ("says the Lord"), He prefers that they should TURN to Him, and this not merely unequivocably, but univocably and that itself, accompanied by passion.

This then will be in  essence and reality applicable in His choosing, the relevant domain, who are His, in foreknowledge which then most mercifully is coded into predestination, ensuring the pitiful purpose is enshrined in the piteous result (cf. Matthew 23:37ff.). Likewise, of course, it ensures, that deception and intrigue find no place (as in Matthew 7:21ff.). The way IS narrow (Matthew 7:15), there is no doubt about that; but this is only in absurdity to be alleged to mean that pity is not back of this narrowness. What is, is; and what is not, is not; and to make this narrow instead of, rather than with the purity of reality is mere subterfuge. As in riding a horse at a gallop on a narrow track, it may get you there both more safely and securely, and faster...

God is not to be judged by philosophical principles, but to be found in His own word. Truth does not bow to dreams. You have to find out where it is shown to be, and investigate this as rational and valid, as nothing else is, from the mind which gave man a rational mind, and to do so with the mind given you for such purposes (as in SMR, for example).

Thus when it comes to the setting of things in reality IN TERMS OF THIS LOVE AS STATED BY GOD, DEFINED AND CLEAR, you do not ignore the law shown, but apply it. IF there was any way that LOVE could find a soul, it IS found and applied and that soul will be among the elect; for God is true to His word and magnifies it above all His name (Psalm 138:2). He is reliable, faithful, dependable, and the truth. It is NOT however found contrary to His word. THAT is the difference: His word. For a preacher of His word, that is ALL the difference! (II TImothy 2:15).

Hence NO ONE who in love might have been found, will be lost. That is not man's word, but God's principle. THAT is what the Bible teaches most clearly. There is no need for a pity which changes the Bible; it is there long before you in that!

What then of the ignorant, that is, those who do not hear the Gospel, for it has never reached them ? Christ covers this too, and as the Truth, He is the best of commentators! I follow Jesus Christ and am not ashamed of it. I am proud of HIM, and forward His name freely (cf.  Acts 4:11-12). Hence I follow His words here also!

Otherwise, I would be false in terms of this passage in Acts, nor would it be wise (Luke 9:26), to be so flitty. That, indeed, is one of the reasons why it is so merciful that not only is there predestination based on foreknowledge incorporating all of love's pity, but expressed in assurance, that once you are justified by His solemn grace, through faith, you will be gloried (Romans 8:17, 30, Ephesians 1:11, Romans 8:16).

SINCE Christ covers all with this love, how does it work out ? Only God knows, but we know enough for truth and pity and the principles of the affair, which is all our concern. How God acts in the form of God, it is high; what He states to be the result is simplicity itself. It is this with which we are dealing.

First then we note Acts 4:11-12. There is no other name given among men.

That seems clear enough for the children. No other name among men is given under heaven! You can see space projecting above the earth in all directions, and except for bush cover or obstruction, you can see it alike everywhere, moving into the heavens, and looking down on all the earth. Very well, then UNDER HEAVEN there is NO other name given AMONG  MEN. That is explicit, exclusive, conclusive, brief, simple and clear.

You may wonder if perhaps man could then invent some other name,  since this one was given, and perhaps a ring-in could be found ? It is however, this one and only name, which happens to be the name of God the Son, INFINITELY able, by which man MUST be saved. Invent another name, as that of Buddha or Muhammad ? Then it is NOT THIS one by which you must be saved; for there IS no other, and you MUST be saved. You are at war with God if you prefer it otherwise, departing therefore from the living God, as demonstrated, verified and validated (cf. Light Dwells with the Lord's Christ, SMR),  from the Biblical faith categorically and centrally, in terms of all that is divine. This is NOT to be an ambassador or a preacher of righteousness but of wrong.

 

THE CASE IN PARTICULAR IN THE VERY PRESENCE OF CHRIST
AND THE AUDITION OF HIS OWN WORDS

In John 15:22ff., Christ in the context of heaven and hell, judgment, its release and its binding, makes it clear that there is a category of  persons to whom final judgment would at the outset, not apply. Such a situation as that which he met was still without stated grounds for judgment. What was this condition, and who were these people ?

It is not that of those who did not HEAR His words or SEE His actions. Rather these people had both seen and heard, but in showing the depth of judgment applicable to them, Christ indicated what would NOT have put them in that place. IF I, He said, had not come and said among you the words spoken, and again, If I had not done among you the works done, "you would have no sin."

How altogether merciful and gracious is the God the Christian adores! Whatever the sin, if HE had not been shown in His planned purpose and practical program of action in history, Gospel words and Gospel-oriented works, then their place in condign condemnation would not have been reached.  More would be required. He did NOT come to judge the world (John 3:17), but that it might be saved. HENCE, without this testimony there is no finality. HOW it is worked out by God is His own affair; but these are the applicable principles, and they are from the mouth of God, in Christ. Ignorance is not a final condemnation, but something at least equivalent to hearings His words and perceiving His works.

If they had not been conversant with the case in view, with what He had done and said, then UNTIL this were the case, they did not have the relevant final sin, leading to adverse destiny. This is the DIVINELY STATED criterion, that light has come into the world, and man have loved darkness rather than light (John 3:19). Let us then rejoice in the magnitude of His mercy and not rebel on account of puny thoughts that contradict both the declared passion His heart and His words. The Light being Jesus Christ as in John 8-9. It is not that are damned  without the relevance of that light t, though of course they as sinners still deserve it. Rather is it that the FINAL resolution of the matter, in view of the love of God, is not done with the mere presence of ignorance, but only in terms of the format for the application of these principles, that of the embracive purpose of His SO loving that He SO sent.  This resolution,  In fact, done before creation begins, and carried out after the trial is over.

Hence, the love of God as shown endlessly in principle, in practice, in entreaty, in offer, in assurance, in poignancy and in heart for all, as His actuating desire, is not aborted, but neither is it distorted or contorted. It is as it is, and where He is rejected as HE knows it to be, so that the preference is foreknown before sin occurred in man, before man was created on this earth, and it is applied: then the sin remains, as it was shown and known before it had an opportunity to declare itself, in all the fallible psychic bits and pieces of experience.  To be sure, if Christ is rejected IN view of these things, as by those to whom He spoke, then their sin remains. It is the other case, where such might NOT have heard or seen, which is not for that, condemned.

This ENSURES that fallen liberty, that found and conferred  as being in the image of God, that towards God Himself, is maintained, love is consummated and fraud is fouled. Moreover, John 15:22ff.  is merely an application of the principle, found in John 3:16-18.. The principle of the scope of love  itself is clearly stated in John 3, where it is in the very midst of the presentation of God's so LOVING THE WORLD, we find that His coming is also NOT TO JUDGE but to save the world. There is principle one, the scope of love of such depth, and there is principle two, the impact of condemnation in terms of the rejection principle, the preference principle as applied by God. In these terms salvation and reprobation alike are stated. 

As to John 3:19, someone might ask:  HOW COULD such an omnipotent Being, with such omniscience and love, possibly fail to gain all persons for His kingdom,  if that is what He wanted ?

That is an irrelevant question. He wanted all in terms of His so loving, not in becoming a dictator, a dracula, not in fouling the entire point of His creation of liberty and assigning love: love, let us be very clear, is not fulfilled by its brutish or other DENIAL, mandating itself to grasp the unwilling, as One unwanted. Love does not fold in order to grab its object, since then it would be foiling,  fouling, abortion itself,  into something other than itself. Where it may be found, in its own pure terms, it IS found. Where it is not, it is absent by exclusion, and that is the preference of the one not found, known to God and faithfully applied. Moreover, the One who knows is to be trusted in doing this. If you do not trust Him, this too, is irrelevant to the nature of the situation; it is merely an application.

NOT trusting Him excludes from Him, and if this is your desire, what apart from hell, is the problem with that ? Without Him there can only be abortion of life, in the desired  absence from life and heart, of Him who made it. If you want to call Him a liar or otherwise assault His name, that is slander, but not a problem of understanding. If however you do trust the Lord, then what is the difficulty ? He says that this is what He will do and on what terms. If you do not believe it, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the divine model, the divine actions or how it is too this or that for you to stomach. If this be so, then it is you who are to be stomached or otherwise, because you withhold trust in your Creator.

Does this allay missionary effort ? If you ever thought God would damn people because you as a missionary or one missioning got up from bed late, you do not understand the wit and wisdom of the Almighty who has the KNOWLEDGE OF HOW to carry out ALL His principles, whatever sin any man may accidentally or incidentally or wilfully engage in.

Let this be said concerning missioning, formal or otherwise. If the love of God does not impel you, and the obvious onset of things worthy of judgment does not move you, so that the entire life lived here is of no consequence to you, what are you ? How is the love of God shed abroad in your heart ? (Romans 5). Since we are all limited beings, we have to find from the Lord the ways in which to forward the Gospel in each case; but the heart is there because of love, and the manifest and open appearance of judgment. Action is needed. God will condemn none except in terms of His stated principles. If we love Him who first loved us, we rejoice that He will cover all who are His, and found in this loving manner. On the other hand; we will act as He did, though without redeeming power in ourselves, to cover what in our small way, we may, by prayer and information,  stored in the Bible,  as it is stored by DNA in our bodies. .

But what for all that, if some fail to reach some people in some particular place, in time for them to hear and to see first His words, and then His works ? What if many remain ignorant of the Gospel, which is the chosen way applicable to all the world, into which with zeal it is sent. If there are some found in the end, who did not hear the Gospel, then this is known to God, and the result is as Christ stated: in this ignorance, their final judgment does not rest. The thing is deeper than judgment-because-of-ignorance, EVEN THOUGH as sinners they ALL deserved it. God does not act like that, and to have imagined that He does in contrary to His word, protestations, encapsulations of principle and exhortations. Beyond history, He has made it. In Christ,  all is resolved, if not in history, then in foreknowledge and predestination.

There is no other way but Jesus Christ, but the atonement of His blood, there is no other Gospel, nor will there ever be; and there is  a path that admits of no opposites or revisions. As to how God performs judgment, the precise mode of His foreknowing action, this is precisely His affair. For Christian Apologetics we may show how it might be done, in order to illustrate the beauty, harmony and adequacy of His principles, and that they do indeed cover all the ramifications of the case, for His divine love and desire for salvation (cf. Predestination and Freewill).  His choice is NOT exclusive  to or limited by this world, nor by the ignorance of any who remain in this condition on this earth. God is without limit, and His knowledge without omissions.

Always, and equally, concerning the  One by WHOM the Father of spirits and the God of all comfort acts in salvation, this IS limited to Jesus Christ. Moreover,  the WAY in which this occurs, is in terms of the Gospel. It is applied with infinite wisdom, so that what is shown on this earth, WHEN the knowledge of the Gospel comes, is at it will be and those ashamed of this Christ on earth, of them God will be ashamed; for those who prefer darkness, have it to keep. When it does not come, God knows beyond the lapsed situation,  being light and knowing where it goes.

As the Westminster Confession states (XII, 3), for  example, all elect persons who are incapable of being called by the ministry of the word, such as infants, and these are named, and thus those who do not have sound minds or never hear the Gospel, unnamed,  will be  saved. That is true to the Bible.

Whatever the dearth, those who are God's elect will despite ignorance on the one hand, and in terms of the principle of the Gospel as the criterion and Christ as the only way back to reconciliation with God, will be saved. That salvation is what He paid for, in the longings of pure, divine love. Loss is for a preference anda this is for knowledge, and God is for all who in knowledge, may be found, and so covers the gaps with grace, for as many as those to whom this applies. Ignorance then is not the barrier; but the Gospel for one and for all may be the barrier, and whether voided  clearly in time, or failing this through ignorance, known only in result from eternity,  all will be reached, if at all, and all so found, if so coming.

In sum, here: These could not grab what the Gospel has, being incapable of hearing a ministry that is not there, are not for this excluded. The applicable test will be carried out in the knowledge of God, whether to be seen on this earth, or still hidden because of the ignorance of those who never on this earth hear the Gospel. Thus various forms of ignorance would be coverable, if God elected such persons. Not one would be lost (cf. John 13). The principle of love, the criterion of preference will be applied, and the maximum attainment will be parallel to the limited atonement.

The theme, then, is opened in the Confession, and rightly so at this point, although the mainspring for such election is omitted from mention, that is, the stated nature of the love of God and the scriptures concerning this. Not so is the case of the Presbyterian Church of Australia, however, as to its Constitution; for, in this case, in the institution of the Church in1901, there is a Declaratory Statement which indicates that the sovereignty of God in electing whom He will, is to be  taken together with the fact that He is not willing that any should perish. That, it is  an excellent, discerning and biblical insistence.  Unfortunately the General  Assembly of 1991 indirectly, but in effect, quashed this addition.

What then ? Ignorance is  NO EXCUSE under any circumstances for sin; but it is not the last word, for God's explicitly states that HIS WORD is the last word, and there is the first word in foreknowledge, before the systematics of creation. As to Him,  His principles include this desire, this criterion and this result, that all be reconciled to Himself, in heaven or on earth (Colossians 1:19ff.), and this restraint, that where any are known to prefer darkness, despite His love and His many exhortations in the Bible and in history, then, it is also His own . This is one of the criteria of love as shown in God, the definitive of all love; and it is one of the characteristics which makes Him lovable.

That One would die for the quashing of sin's shame and guilt, lethal punishment and outcome is wonderful; that He would passionately act to secure this is more so; that He would offer freely the results of this love, if possible is more so again; but that He should show restraint, and in no way,  direct or indirect, so act that where the preference for light was NOT foreknown, or not shown in relevant history, then He  will not sweep in those of such  a disposition regardless into His kingdom is a summit of purity, making life vastly preferable to some obfuscatory sovereignty which has no such high regard for His creatures, for purity of action or for the scope of love.

What then ? Because of human pathology, man can not simply choose in history, as if some flavour of ice-cream; for man is born not of his own will or his own blood or any such thing (John 1:12). Because of divine love GOD CAN and DOES CHOOSE in terms of His love, with human preference the differential for the selection of those won, and loss of those not so. Such is His statement, such His criterion, such His love.

In view of this ,then, and the nature of the case (that it is with persons that He is dealing, those amazingly made in His image),  there is a thus a divinely enabled  exclusion zone, which shows what SORT of sovereignty is that of God. It is a loving sovereignty, utterly exhaustive in its practical method of saving, utterly pure in its methods of securing loving outcomes, utterly fulfilled in having a restraint which would adorn many on this earth, when they seek to ravage or compel those who they love, to be with them.

Thus Christ shows that preference contrary to the light is honoured in its dishonour, enabled in its implacability, so that persons are not taunted by being made different so that they may bear the name but not the heart that would love God!  He acts on His foreknowledge, and observes His principle that preferring darkness to His light means that the principle of exclusion is exhibited. This is the way to a condemnation not only just, but despite His love, which has its own purity, and knowing all, excludes where this applies, so that in man only is the exclusion, though the operator concerning it, is God.

God wept, Christ wept for Jerusalem, God grieved for Moab, as shown, God strove for the reaching of man by wisdom, offering much and all indeed needed for understanding; but when this is rebutted, when mercy is either neglected, BEING SHOWN, or denied, then light having no more place, and love no lair, God is not present, and in His absence, not only is judgment according to truth resultant, but life is a forlorn and shameful thing, imbued with a dark desire, contrary to what it is and might be.

Thus, God is true, and never devious. Null  preference  for light DOES have an exclusion from the results of the love. It is then, as always,   the stated ground of some being lost as in John 3:19. What is so foreknown may be seen in the predestination which shows it, but this is a resultant, not the cause, the assurance of the love's reaching to the uttermost, the insurance for truth for man.

As to God, He is never thwarted, however much He may elect to suffer as at Calvary. In the end, with the pangs of love,  even for pagan Moab as in Jeremiah 48:36!.even for Nineveh (cf. Ch. 6   above), He endures as loving.

Moreover, He brings forth to the light those whose heart is for the light as seen before time, and through His light shows the darkness preference of those who are averse to it. In this, He acts through His sovereign grace in finding His own, themselves no better than others, since it is sin which elevates and depresses and HIS choice is before human sin. Moreover, it is not at all based on works, what a man does, which might in part flow from what he is differentially; but it is based on His Divine Knowledge (Romans 9:11); and this in such a way that this is the situation in reality, and not so only in name. God loves. God so loves that He sends His Son as Saviour with the salvation of the world in sight. .This is unlimited in love, void of desire for judgment, as shown in John 3; and this is as repeatedly you see in the reference to the mind,  feelings and approach from God.

 Indeed, this  salvation IS firmly based on HIS OWN divine works, both in the atonement, and the discernment, in the rescue and the means for it, in the exclusive application of grace without works, in the exclusive Saviour Jesus Christ, the exclusive blood which He shed, once only and for ever, to quieten and bear the guilt of sin, as likewise to sustain the impact of its dynamic and its destiny. Then like untamed rocket, He arises from the earth and soars into splendour, for death  cannot hold Him, as Peter declared at Pentecost (Acts 2). At the time of His return, to carry to heaven which is our home, those who know Him, all those who are His own, just as truth will out, it is out. So has He prepared a place(John 14), and so is it ready.

God in love SO seeks; man in preference very often  SO desires NOT to be sought, not to have darkness, instead. Since God knows from the first the situation to the last, and knows it in His own divine manner, the matter is irrevocable, as truth always is. The lie is mere appearance; reality supervenes.

From this love, and darkness' preference in some to the uttermost from the first,  He declares the EXCLUSION PRINCIPLE. The cause of the loss of a soul is statedly  man's  preference. God does not disregard this, as He might disregard sin when it is covered by blood, invoked by faith. This is not a gift to be given with passion; it is a refusal to be honoured despite compassion.

When this faith is there,  then comes the realisation of faith which never as if dead, rests without working (James 2), because it also loves; yet never fails to rest in spirit, beyond working; for it knows that its works are not its source of salvation, but the thrust of love and obedience to please God,  in the power of His word and the grace of His Spirit (Ephesians 2, Romans 3).

It is very straightforward. Wisdom is like that (Proverbs 8:8). God  to Himself assigns love,  that the world might be saved. God to man assigns a second  degree guilt to many, who despite this love FOR them, have love in the last (and divine) analysis, even  seen before time and sin, for darkness in preference. God does not hesitate to appoint the cause of this exclusion to man, and to declare that this is so. That is despite the love for the world and the determination in this saving exercise, not to judge man in it.

Thus, in John 3, having just divinely articulated the SCOPE of His impassioned love with its practical gift, He proceeds to announce that the exclusion is due the preference of man. It is in the very face of the desires of love, from God. What  could be kinder, more delicate in desire, more beautiful in holiness, more straightforward.

It is as if God said:  I would  like to save you, please come. It is as though man replied: II would not like to be saved in this way (or maybe at  all). Very well, is the divine conclusion: this is your condemnation that light has come and you have preferred darkness. Why is it in this field, that many men stumble, and some would even change the entire  face of the Gospel, even in the light  of indubitable scriptures that proclaim the nature of God, man and salvation! Why do they prefer to invent counter-scriptural nonsense and act as if this were a problem  for the biblical  depiction. Nothing could be further from the truth. Depart from the divine model, what it says and proclaims, and you thoughts to the point are not at all relevant to what it is and declares. Invent substitute ideas to substitute for the Gospel and the word of God, and you merely aggravate what misrepresents. The truth remains; the lie has a short shelf-life, and departure from the word of God is not in the truth.

Why then does this human knowledge defy and defile the name of Christ as these reports concerning Billy Graham attest ? Nor is he alone, for many for long have done such things. It is simple failure to be faithful to the word of God, and since in the word of God there is no such problem, there is no visible excuse. Nor is there any excuse for those who, turning their backs on Christ, imagine things, and put their trust in the unvalidated and riotous unreason of the works and words of man.

Alas, any such movement away from the unique, the exclusive, the undimmed divine glory of the Gospel in and of Jesus Christ: It is a failed conversation with pagan culture, despicable in its derogation of deity, in its elevation of humanity and in its dreams as in Jeremiah 23. In the latter days, said that prophet in discussing those who ran, but were not sent by God, who stole their words every man from his neighbour (social promulgation, not divine), then this phenomenon of false prophecy will be present to perfection!

Alas,  as also in Matthew 24:24, it is. If it were not, the Bible would be wrong. As always, painful though the permutations of the impermeable Gospel are to behold, it is not wrong. Its song is fulfilled to the last note. It is of exquisite and surpassing beauty, in truth and in wisdom, in love and in restraint, in passion and in outreach. Truly as to the Lord, there is none like Him!

NOTES

*1

This is so in view of the relevant content of the Koran, contrary to Christ deity, diverse on His death (mutually self-contradictory), contrary to His sacrificial atonement, to His being God.

See on these things:.

More Marvels ... Ch.     4, esp.  *4, 

SMR   pp. 829ff. , 1080

Dancers, Prancers, Lancers and Answers Ch. 3, *1A misconceptions about the Cross, variable and mutually conflicting, on the part of the Koran

Lord of Life Ch.  3 (and force), 1081ff. (and faith), Outrageous Outages  ... Ch.   5; 

His Wounds Opened Eternity Ch.    4;     3

Stepping Out for Christ Ch.    9,  

Tender Times for Timely Truth Ch.    8 (in perspective), see also *1,

See Divine Agenda Chs.    6
with  3 (an overview of religious truancies, including Marx, Darwin and Koran)
and Highway to Hell - (Koran citations in both, with ideational parallels in perspective,  in the latter two;  and in the former,  futile depravities in endless ideologies such as Sudan has shown so significantly, Islam ablaze without glory),
cf. Overflight in Christ Ch.   1 (and the Koran's musings);
 

*2

See Possess Your Possessions Vol. 10, Ch. 6, including * 1 and I10.

*3

See for  example:

SMR Appendix B,

Christ Incomparable, Lord Indomitable Ch. 9 and Epilogue,

Great Execrations ... Greater Faith Chs.  7-9,

Grand Biblical Perspectives Ch. 7 esp.. 

        Chapter 6 Possess Your Possessions, Volume 10,

        REJOICING IN THE ETERNAL TRUTH

        AND GREAT MERCY OF GOD