Does God love everyone? Does God love everyone the same?

[missmuffet]

 

 

I speak of what I believe because that is what the Bible tells me.I have to speak the truth of what I see.I am not trying to pass off my beliefs on others.But as a Christian I do have the right to believe as I choose.

 

 

It is not only a right, it is a responsibility I believe. My only point is, that we need to be sure, not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I think that the Pharisees, thought they were doing well believing what the scriptures taught. When we substitute what we think the bible says, with what is actually says, we become blind leaders of the blind.  We need to be careful.  If I failed to give my brother of sister a fair hearing, and just ignore everything they way, because I disagree with some of it, I am the one who will suffer loss.

To me that is like panning for gold. In the pan, there is intermixed, sand and gravel, and gold nuggets. If the pan has sand in it, do I throw out the gold nuggets too? Or, is it better to inspect the contents of the pan and toss the gravel aside, but keep the gold nuggets?

 

You are speaking in idioms.I study the true literal word of God.The Holy Spirit tells me the truth and give me discernment.I do not think I know what the Bible says I know.There are all kind of interpretations on Worthy but I can reject any one of those interpretations if that is not what the word of God is telling me.Life is full of choices and people can come to any kind of conclusion of what a verse says.You put 10 people in a room and give them a verse in the Bible.You might come up with 10 different interpretations.

[Omegaman 3.0]

I am sorry, i thought the 'idioms' made good points, perhaps I should cease replying to you as often, since you either cannot understand what I am saying, or do not choose to care. I know you believe the literal word, you say that very frequently, this is not news.

 

You say:

 

 

 

There are all kind of interpretations on Worthy but I can reject any one of those interpretations if that is not what the word of God is telling me.

 

Well, what about what God is telling others? No prophecy of scripture is of any private understanding. What makes me nervous about your assertion, is that it almost sounds as though what you believe God says, is the only correct understanding. If that is the case, then everyone who disagrees with you, is wrong, and is disagreeing with God. Careful there sister! If I thought that my understanding was that infallible, I would never ask another believer any question about spiritual matters at all.

[Littlelambseativy]

D.C. Carson is also a Calvinist.That is two marks against Carson for me.

Calvinists can be Christians too Bobeep...they are still your brother and sister

Did I say they were not?I just do not support Calvinism.

Do you really understand all of Calvinism? Why so strident ? Non of the great reformers was perfect yet God used each one to suit His purpose. I may not agree with all of them but if they are anointed by God we should be careful when we hold them in contempt. If I misunderstood your stance I apologize.

Yes,I have read and studied Calvinism because of the interest of many Christians.I do not support Calvinism.The 5 point especially.

Which five point?

Are you a Calvinist?You are not familiar with the 5 points of Calvinism?

 

http://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinist.html

I am of the Calvinist persuasion. Do I know what Calvinism is or what he taught...yes, I am aware of the TULIP AND DAISY theories. If you actually read what Calvin said not just what someone says he said or what the person's interpretation of Calvin's teaching is it would be better.

We read the same Bible, believe in the same God and that He sent His Son Jesus to be born one of us, die and rise again all so that if we believe on God's Son Jesus we will have eternal life. Yet on certain issues, we find disagreement and if another does not accept our belief or interpretation we tend to belittle and question their Faith. Perhaps we need to look at our own beliefs in the same way we look at others and be less questioning of their faith and let God be the judge. To have a discussion sadly on certain issues only leads to hurt and misunderstanding and a shut down of the main post. I guess that is why we read the same Bible but have so many different denominations and each denomination looks askance at the others and thinks them wrong....even though we believe the same things to be accepted as children of God and Bride of the Son....interesting.

[missmuffet]

I am sorry, i thought the 'idioms' made good points, perhaps I should cease replying to you as often, since you either cannot understand what I am saying, or do not choose to care. I know you believe the literal word, you say that very frequently, this is not news.

 

You say:

 

 

 

There are all kind of interpretations on Worthy but I can reject any one of those interpretations if that is not what the word of God is telling me.

 

Well, what about what God is telling others? No prophecy of scripture is of any private understanding. What makes me nervous about your assertion, is that it almost sounds as though what you believe God says, is the only correct understanding. If that is the case, then everyone who disagrees with you, is wrong, and is disagreeing with God. Careful there sister! If I thought that my understanding was that infallible, I would never ask another believer any question about spiritual matters at all.

That is your choice if you choose not to reply to me as often.I believe that the literal true word of God in the Bible is the only interpretation.The truth.If a person disagrees with me that is their choice.I certainly am not going to chastise them for it or tell them they are wrong.I will tell someone that I feel that their interpretation is false doctrine if it comes to that.

[missmuffet]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D.C. Carson is also a Calvinist.That is two marks against Carson for me.

Calvinists can be Christians too Bobeep...they are still your brother and sister

Did I say they were not?I just do not support Calvinism.

Do you really understand all of Calvinism? Why so strident ? Non of the great reformers was perfect yet God used each one to suit His purpose. I may not agree with all of them but if they are anointed by God we should be careful when we hold them in contempt. If I misunderstood your stance I apologize.

Yes,I have read and studied Calvinism because of the interest of many Christians.I do not support Calvinism.The 5 point especially.

Which five point?

Are you a Calvinist?You are not familiar with the 5 points of Calvinism?

 

http://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinist.html

I am of the Calvinist persuasion. Do I know what Calvinism is or what he taught...yes, I am aware of the TULIP AND DAISY theories. If you actually read what Calvin said not just what someone says he said or what the person's interpretation of Calvin's teaching is it would be better.

We read the same Bible, believe in the same God and that He sent His Son Jesus to be born one of us, die and rise again all so that if we believe on God's Son Jesus we will have eternal life. Yet on certain issues, we find disagreement and if another does not accept our belief or interpretation we tend to belittle and question their Faith. Perhaps we need to look at our own beliefs in the same way we look at others and be less questioning of their faith and let God be the judge. To have a discussion sadly on certain issues only leads to hurt and misunderstanding and a shut down of the main post. I guess that is why we read the same Bible but have so many different denominations and each denomination looks askance at the others and thinks them wrong....even though we believe the same things to be accepted as children of God and Bride of the Son....interesting.

 

If you are a Calvinist that is your choice.I am not going to berate you for what you believe.There are many who believe in Calvinism.I do not believe that is what God wants from us as brothers and sisters in Christ.

[Omegaman 3.0]

I actually like a lot of what you have to say bopeep, but I am also confused by it from time to time. Like for example, above you said:

 

"I certainly am not going to chastise them for it or tell them they are wrong. I will tell someone that I feel that their interpretation is false doctrine if it comes to that."

 

Now, it sort of seems to me that it technically possible to avoid saying "you are wrong". However, when you say their doctrine is false doctrine, haven't you not really done so? If their doctrine is false doctrine, then in fact they ARE wrong, lol!

 

I don't prefer to get to much into what amounts to legal technicalities over the words we say to each other, but I will do so and give you the benefit of a doubt in your above quoted statement. Since there you said:

 

that you "feel" their interpretation is wrong, you have bought yourself some wiggle room. However, at the same time, I do not think we feel our way to knowing something, and  what I find to be troublesome, is when people imply that their understanding is better than that of another, they are dismissing the validity of the other person's feelings, or knowledge or whatever it is that they said.

 

When you say you understand the bible literally, I know I can find dozens of cases, if not hundreds of cases, where you do not understand it literally, and I suspect that you know that is true. We all have some passages where we say that is literal, and this one is not, and usually we have good reasons for those distinctions. 

 

What I always have difficulty with, is how people, decide which ones are literal, and which are not. Too often I see people deciding on the basis of their feelings and prejudices, and I am not sure that is a valid way to interpret scripture. I notice that people will sometimes say (in general, not speaking of you):

 

"Well, that is your interpretation". Often, this occurs when you did not offer an interpretation, all you did was quote scripture. If people do not like what scripture says, then suddenly, it is 'your interpretation', or it has just become figurative language, not literal. How convenient.

 

This sort of thing, is a way of avoiding letting the scripture speak to us, and instead, put us in a position of authority where what we believe, is more valid than the belief of others. It is such a shame, and such a waste of time and energy.

 

It is especially sad, when we harden our hearts to what God is speaking, and then claim that this is God convicting us of a truth. Those who do this (and there are plenty, but likely few or none who are aware they are doing it) are putting words into God's mouth, just to maintain their pride and not have to admit they are wrong.

 

What I say to you now, of course has no meaning, since you can dismiss me out of hand, since I embrace so called Calvinism (now, I did not a year or two ago), and post trib rapturism etc. Clearly, God has nothing he can say to you  (or to others) through me, since my being wrong in an area of peripheral theology, makes it such that I must be wrong on other things as well.

 

Now, you may not want to dignify my comments with a reply, or perhaps you do. That is entirely up to you. I am going to close this thread, since it has had a fair amount of time to discuss the topic, and I do not want to watch it closely to see that participants are behaving properly. It is certainly obvious that it is not staying on topic, and we are a little short handed in terms of administrators, to police the forums (and really we should not have to). I will reopen it at a later time, if and when I have more time available, but when I do, it will be on topic, not about who who can be trusted with doctrine. I thought I was doing the thread a favor, by pointing to a resource, which a scholar has put a lot of thought and research into. It appears that that was a mistake in judgement on my part.

 

So you, bopeep, or anyone else wants to have a last word, either about this petty squabbling over who can interpret scripture, and who can not, or about the topic of whether God loves everyone the same or not, now is your chance. I plan to close the topic in 16 hours, most likely, so speak now, or forever hold your peace.

[By Faith]

 

D.C. Carson is also a Calvinist.That is two marks against Carson for me.

 

Just a thought . . . 

 

and this is for anyone, not directed at or to bopeep, but to us all . . . .

 

If we disagree with some one on a point of doctrine, does that make them wrong about other doctrines? If someone, even an unbeliever, quotes the Bible, does the bible become less true, because of who said it, or because they believe something different?

 

So, to me, if this is how we want to think of things, I should never pay attention to anything any pastor I have ever heard, or any Christian author, has ever written, because I can probably find some point of disagreement. 

 

If we disagree with someone, especially on peripheral issues, such as the millennium or  "Calvinism", do we not stop to consider, that perhaps it is we who are wrong, and instead of them? I find it more that likely, that I am probably wrong about something, but if I lay out my case, with scripture, I hope that people can look past me, to what the scripture says, and take direction from the bible, not me, the imperfect sinner.

 

Now, back to the subject of the love of God . . . . PLEASE!

 

 

Well, certainly I don't agree with his end time position and I hate the Calvinist doctrine. I read a good chunk of his book however, and understand most of his college level (High Level) candid references assuming we all should also understand. For your average believe on the love of God though, I suspect they would be lost in the quagmire. 

 

Kenneth Hagins book "Love the way to victory" contained real life examples and scriptures on walking in love, in God's love. Real easy to follow, like giving his wife the best egg in the morning, a way of life..

 

Does a disagreement in one point, make all the other points bad? Does one eat the fish and spit out the bones, or does he avoid the fish altogether?

 

Calvinism says God loves who he chooses, and picks who he chooses. If someones view of God is this, then God so loved the World can get a bit twisted in other writings. 

 

However, if you dig deeper and look at the opposite end of Calvinism who says not by God's foreknowledge but by election. Is not foreknowledge also the same? Well, God may take a bowling ball and choose to smash the vases he wants in the hall, but knowing the outcome of just rolling the ball and knowing what vases are hit is the same thing, different method. 

 

God puts the spirit in man, and if causing this reaction in the right place, time and knowing the situations of such man, it's still reverts back to Calvinism. Does man have a free choice anyway? The yoke of Jesus being lite, the yoke of the enemy being heavy, you have to pick one regardless. Pick your yoke.

 

Hence I read though a lot of the book, because I know those who oppose election will say God knows the end from the begging misquoting a scripture in Isa, and have no spiritual insight they really are picking election anyway, meaning there could be something revealed by God to a man that could help.

 

Be blessed.

[Matthew T.]

That was a very informative post. Omega. Thanks.

[Bible2]

Ezra said in post 48:

 

It would be presumptuous for humans to assess whether God loves everyone "equally", but there is no question that He loves His entire creation and all humanity.  Otherwise He would not desire the salvation of all (1 Tim 2:1-4), and ultimately the liberation of His creation from bondage.

 

"Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4).

 

1 Timothy 2:4 means God will have all manner of people believe in Jesus and be saved (Revelation 5:9b), not absolutely all people (Romans 9:11-24), just as, for example, John 3:26c means all manner of people came to Jesus during his first-coming earthly ministry, not absolutely all people. The original Greek word (pas: G3956) translated as "all" can simply mean "all manner of" (e.g. Acts 10:12). It doesn't have to mean absolutely all.

 

1 Timothy 2:4 doesn't mean absolutely all people can believe in Jesus. For other verses show that some people (the nonelect) can't (John 6:65, John 8:42-47, John 10:26, Matthew 13:38-42). Also, 1 Timothy 2:4 doesn't mean absolutely all people will be saved, for other verses show that most people won't be saved (Matthew 25:41,46, Matthew 13:38-42, Matthew 7:14, Matthew 22:14).

[Bible2]

By Faith said in post 57:

 

However, if you dig deeper and look at the opposite end of Calvinism who says not by God's foreknowledge but by election. Is not foreknowledge also the same? Well, God may take a bowling ball and choose to smash the vases he wants in the hall, but knowing the outcome of just rolling the ball and knowing what vases are hit is the same thing, different method.

 

God puts the spirit in man, and if causing this reaction in the right place, time and knowing the situations of such man, it's still reverts back to Calvinism. Does man have a free choice anyway?

 

God is definitely omniscient, for in him is found all knowledge (Colossians 2:2b-3; 1 John 3:20b). He is able to declare the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:10), and his foreknowledge is determinate (Acts 2:23, Revelation 1:1). But his omniscience coexists with his giving people free will. He still lets people choose for themselves what they are going to do (Joshua 24:15, Deuteronomy 30:19, Isaiah 1:19-20, Philemon 1:14).

 

An analogy for how people can have a meaningful free will and yet God can already know what they are going to choose to do, would be a symphony conductor who wanted to make a film of a "Free Will Symphony" which sounded good enough to show off to the world. So he told his symphony musicians his plan, set up a movie camera in front of them, and said each of them could start playing whatever he or she wanted for an hour. But when they all started playing, it sounded awful for the entire hour. It was utter cacophony. So the conductor sent them home and told them to come back the next day and try again. The next day sounded worse than the first. And the day after that was also bad. This went on day after day for months, until one day the most amazing sound arose from the symphony, a congeries of all the different melodies and rhythms which was unlike anything that anyone had heard before. So the conductor kept the movie of that day, and showed it off to the world.

 

But when the symphony musicians began watching the movie at its world premiere, with all the most-famous musicians of the world seated around them in the theater, some of the symphony musicians began to squirm in their seats. For example, one of the bass players had happened to choose that day (the day the movie was made) just to stand there and not play anything. The movie showed him eating Twix, and just staring off into space for the whole hour. And one of the violin players had just happened to choose that day not to play anything either, but to file her nails and flip through a magazine.

 

After the movie was over, those two musicians, as well as some others who had been publicly mortified, filed a civil suit against the conductor for defamation of character. At the trial, they testified before the judge: "Before the movie was shown, we all had good reputations as fine musicians. Now we are the laughingstocks of the musical world. Our careers might never recover from this. The conductor knew before he showed the movie to the world that it would result in our ruin, and yet he showed it anyway. Clearly, his intent was malicious, and we seek damages".

 

But then the conductor testified: "Your honor, I honestly had no malice toward these musicians. The procedure of making the film was quite random. We made scores of different films, and in many of them, these musicians played brilliantly. But the sound of the symphony as a whole on those days was unbearable to listen to, so those films had to be rejected. It was just by chance that the one day that sounded wonderful, they happened to have made fools of themselves by their own free will. They themselves chose to act that way that day. I didn't make them do anything".

 

The judge agreed and dismissed the case. He told the musicians: "I'm sorry, but you don't really have a legal leg to stand on. For you knew the conductor was making a film of that day, and that the plan was to show it to the world if it sounded good. It is your own fault you chose to act the way you did that day" (cf. James 1:13-15).

 

Similar to this analogy, before God created the world, he could have reviewed an infinite number of different threads (as it were) of all the possible free-willed sequences of events which could occur in the world, based on all the possible choices each individual could make during his or her lifetime. For example, in one thread, right after God created Adam, Adam could have chosen first to walk around the south side of the Garden of Eden, while in another thread, Adam chose first to walk around the north side, and in another he chose first just to sit on the grass and look at the trees, and so on through all the different possibilities for his first choice, and then through all the different possibilities for all his subsequent choices, and then through all the possible choices made by everyone else from the beginning of the world to the end of it. After reviewing the infinite number of threads of all the possible sequences of free-willed choices, God could have chosen to create, to bring into actual existence, that one thread which would give him the best opportunity to eternally show both his mercy and his wrath (Romans 9:22-23).

 

Also similar to the movie analogy is the scientific idea of the "block universe", meaning that time, from the viewpoint of physics in itself (i.e. outside of how humans happen to experience time) there is no arrow of time: The past, present, and future of all space in the universe exist as one block of a 4-dimensional space-time. So the past still exists, and the future already exists. This is similar to how all the frames of a film, all its moments of time, exist at the same time in one reel of film, yet we humans happen to experience a film only one frame at a time, and in one direction. Also, with regard to the "block universe", quantum-level experiments have shown that the future determines the past as much as the past determines the future. So from the viewpoint of Christians, this means they can pray for God's will to be done in the past, just as they can pray for it to be done in the future. For example, if they remember a close call in their past where they just barely escaped having a car accident, they can presently pray that God would keep them from having that accident, and this could help them to avoid it. That is, they could have avoided it because years later they prayed to avoid it.