will God hate one and Loves other?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

pilli

Guest
#1
As God hated Esau and God loved jacob. why He do like that. Does He has any pratiality?
 
B

Baruch

Guest
#2
As God hated Esau and God loved jacob. why He do like that. Does He has any pratiality?
Esau didn't value the first inheritance. That is the blessing one gets for being a first born. Esau gave it up for a meal. Jacob valued the first inheritance and all the responsibility of being of God's chosen lineage with it as being a witness of Him.

Esau loved the temporary things over God down here while Jacob loved the eternal God.

Kind of like what Jesus said about mammon aka money.

Matthew 6: 24No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
 

BLC

Banned
Feb 28, 2009
711
4
0
#3
Esau didn't value the first inheritance. That is the blessing one gets for being a first born. Esau gave it up for a meal. Jacob valued the first inheritance and all the responsibility of being of God's chosen lineage with it as being a witness of Him.

Esau loved the temporary things over God down here while Jacob loved the eternal God.

Kind of like what Jesus said about mammon aka money.

Matthew 6: 24No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Why don't you explain how Jacob really got that birthright away from Esau and also how Jacob conspired with his mother to get the blessing of Isaac away from Esau. Then explain how God loved Jacob, despite his conspiring deceit in both cases. Don't try to spiritualize what happened just explain it as it is. Then answer this. How can God honor the birthright and the blessing of Isaac after both were obtained deceitfully by Jacob?
 
Jan 10, 2007
68
1
8
#4
Why not just say what the Bible says about it?

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Romans 9:11-13

It had nothing to do with anything either Jacob or Esau did in their lifetimes. God made his choice before they were ever born so that nobody could say it had anything to do with their works but was only based on God's calling. And I love how God predicted the question we would ask after reading this:

Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Romans 9:19-20

The Apostle Paul, speaking under the inspiration of God, felt no need to apologize for God and rebuked the very question with the absurdity of us even presuming to question almighty God. If God wanted to defend himself or explain his reasoning he could have, but he didn't. It would seem rather absurd to spend an entire forum thread trying to explain or defend something God answered in only a few verses in Romans 9. There are countless more verses in the Bible that relate to this topic and it could be rather edifying, but as long as people stay with the plain sense of scripture you will still come back to the simple concise answer God already gave here.

Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Romans 9:21-22

I have never seen a clay pot complain about being a pot and not a cup or vase. Us complaining about God's will for our life is even more absurd. Remember, justice and fairness from God Almighty means we all go to hell where we justly deserve to be anyway. It's only grace that Jesus took our just penalty and pair our fine in his own blood. Thank him for going above and beyond what he had to do because he didn't have to do anything. Don't question him for his methods, just be thankful he made away for you to escape hell.

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
2 Peter 1:10-11
 
B

Baruch

Guest
#5
Why don't you explain how Jacob really got that birthright away from Esau and also how Jacob conspired with his mother to get the blessing of Isaac away from Esau. Then explain how God loved Jacob, despite his conspiring deceit in both cases. Don't try to spiritualize what happened just explain it as it is. Then answer this. How can God honor the birthright and the blessing of Isaac after both were obtained deceitfully by Jacob?
Those questions are expounding from the question of the OP. When asked a general question, a general overall response will appear like spiritualizing to you, but it is within the confine of the OP.

And posters complaining about long posts would appreciate sticking to the OP..
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
#6
No, no, no, no, no!!! to all the above. Esau, went on the be blessed tremendously by God remember the end of the story, has nothing to do with predestination, nothing to do with respect of persons. yes it did not please God That he gave up His birth right, But God is a God of second chances, third chances and so on. Veron Magee says that this same question why did God hate esau has puzzled alot of bible scholars over the years, but what puzzles Veron was not why God hated Esau but rather why God loved Jacob, and why God Loved Veron. this is also a good question why does God love Me. But the reason God hated Esau was because Esau said Ge 25:32And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me?
Esau had heard all the stories of the forefathers, He was a hebrew he knew the promises of God but yet He had no faith in God to provide for His daily needs, and we all know
Heb 11:6But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
This is why Esau displeased God it was up to him and Not God to take care of Him
 
Jan 10, 2007
68
1
8
#7
Esau prospered later in his life and founded the Edomites. This does not mean that he was blessed by God. I believe 1Timothy 6:5 has something to say about supposing that gain is godliness. As for the rest of the story regarding God and Esau; Why not go to the last book of the Old Testament. That's where Paul was quoting from when he wrote Romans 9.

The burden of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi. I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever.
Malachi 1:1-4

This is abundantly clear. Not only did God hate Esau, but continued this hatred throughout the rest of his ancestors. He said he laid Esau's mountains waste. He promised to destroy all they they set out to build. He said they would be called the people that God would have indignation against for ever. To me the context from which Paul was quoting only serves to strengthen the point God made through Paul in Romans 9. Maybe its not comfortable for modern christians to accept the hatred of God much less a hatred as serious as Malachi revealed he toward Esau and his descendants. This is the Word of God. I didn't write it. I didn't change it. Just because Esau took himself ungodly wives, had many children and increased in riches doesn't mean that God loved or blessed him. You could make a better case for God loving and blessing Ishmael and yet it is primarily his descendants that are the Muslims of today. Call it peaceful all you want but ask any Christian living in a muslim country (there are many here on Christianchat) and ask them if Islam is peaceful. That's obviously getting slightly off topic but both Ishmael and Esau were children of the patriarchs, and God did promise to multiply him exceedingly. But, God also said he would be a wild man that would be against all men and all men would be against him. Maybe you need to define God's blessing. Isaiah 10 said God sent the Assyrians to spoil his people as the rod of his anger, they were the instruments of his wrath in punishing his people for forsaking him. Yet it also says God would then punish the Assyrians for their pride in the action their conquests.

Bottom line, you gave your explanation of what you think God meant but it doesn't sound anything like what Paul explanation under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit writing the infallible word of God, much less Malachi's synopsis of Esau and his descendants the Edomites under the same infallible inspiration. No offense Thadeas, I like some of your posts in other threads, but I think I'll go with scripture on this one. If God said he hated them before birth so that nobody could say it had anything to do with works then that's what God did. If God said he destroyed Esau's mountains and everything his descendant's would build then that's what God did. If God said he would have indignation against Esau's descendants forever, then God does.
 

daddycat

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2007
170
2
18
60
#8
Why don't you explain how Jacob really got that birthright away from Esau and also how Jacob conspired with his mother to get the blessing of Isaac away from Esau. Then explain how God loved Jacob, despite his conspiring deceit in both cases. Don't try to spiritualize what happened just explain it as it is. Then answer this. How can God honor the birthright and the blessing of Isaac after both were obtained deceitfully by Jacob?
great question... thank you
 

daddycat

Senior Member
Feb 15, 2007
170
2
18
60
#9

If God said he hated them before birth so that nobody could say it had anything to do with works then that's what God did. If God said he destroyed Esau's mountains and everything his descendant's would build then that's what God did. If God said he would have indignation against Esau's descendants forever, then God does.


Is it impious to wonder why?

 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
#11
Why not just say what the Bible says about it?

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Romans 9:11-13

It had nothing to do with anything either Jacob or Esau did in their lifetimes. God made his choice before they were ever born so that nobody could say it had anything to do with their works but was only based on God's calling. And I love how God predicted the question we would ask after reading this:




Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Romans 9:21-22
I want to make a very important point Concerning rom, 9:21 that you are over looking and I have a question about a verse that opposes your doctrine of grace of the calvinist doctinr concerning predestination, and see your take on it . first:

Ro 9:21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
this has nothing to do with God predetermining one vessel to heaven and the other to hell. look careful at this one phase, of the same lump, this is two vessels within one lump, one vessel (Spiritual vessel) unto honour, and one vessel (fleshly vessel) unto dishonour. the same lump of clay , man comes the the ground. one lump of clay with two vessels within or making up of one lump. look at the contents
Ro 9:22What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:Ro 9:23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
He had much longsuffering concerning the vessels ( flesh) of wrath fitted for destruction, That He might show is riches on the vessel ( spirit ) that received of his Glory. Joh 3:6That which is born of the FLESH is FLESH; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Ro 8:8So then they that are in the FLESH cannot please God.

1co 1:29That no FLESH should glory in his presence.
Two vessels one lump not one sent to hell the other to heaven . one displeasing to God one pleasing to God within the same Lump

Ga 5:17For the FLESH lusteth against the SPIRIT, and the SPIRIT against the FLESH: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
Now The verse that I would ask for your help with, if paul truly preach predestination as John calvin said and others now a days preach through the Doctrine of grace( tulip ) if the elect are predetermined before our time begin to be in heaven and the ones not elected are sent to hell, then why did Paul say this

2ti 2:7Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.2ti 2:8Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:2ti 2:9Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.2ti 2:10Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.2ti 2:11It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:2ti 2:12If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:2ti 2:13If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself. 2tim. 2:10 is the verse, Paul who was suppose to teach us that elect were predetermined into the kingdom of God, before time begin as we know it. tells us here that even the elect needs to obtain salvation, please explain this for me , do not insult this verse The very word Of God Itself with that statement that Paul didn't know who the elect was so He had to preach it this way . for it clearly says the the elect themselves may obtain salvation, they had not yet received but that they may obtain salvaltion , I want to point out one more thing here paul the father of predestination said about our salvation. verse 12 if we deny him, he also will deny us: looks to me like God would have His people have a choice in the matter of their salvation. it is by His fore knowledge He knew who deny him and who would receive Him before time begin.
 
P

pilli

Guest
#12
God hated Easu when he is in womb. I Know that God knows future, then why He created Easu?
in the same way?
God knows about a person that, this person will become a sinner. then why God created him. means does God want His people to go hell.
now a days many people are going to hell, does He know before, that they will suffer?
 
B

Baruch

Guest
#13
God hated Easu when he is in womb. I Know that God knows future, then why He created Easu?
in the same way?
God knows about a person that, this person will become a sinner. then why God created him. means does God want His people to go hell.
now a days many people are going to hell, does He know before, that they will suffer?
Well, now that you have expounded on the question from the OP towards predestinaition.... my response to the original OP will be inadequate if that was where you were going with it.

Solder_Of_Christ and Thaddaeus are going at it from different angles.

Soldier_of_Christ is addressing predestination BUT if I may add the foreknowledge of God in that He knew whom would come to Him and whom would not.... to the aspect of predestination, then we can see why He would say ahead of time of whom He hated and whom He loved.

Consider how those come to God and why those that do not.

John 3:18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

As the great commission is to preach the Gosple in all the world... we have this as a testimony of the early church...

Acts 16: 6Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, 7After they were come to Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not. 8And they passing by Mysia came down to Troas. 9And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us. 10And after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for to preach the gospel unto them.

So here is a witness of how God knew the Gospel was not going to be received in Asia nor Mysia at that time, but He knew there were those seeking God in Macedonia.

This is a comfort knowing that all those that seek shall find as God knows all those that seek Him will get the Gospel.

Now for Thaddaeus, I believe he is addressing the one lump in Romans 9 BUT from what I am reading it as, it is the believers of that same house that are designated as vessels unto honour and vessels unto dishonour. I do not believe Romans 9 was addressing the potential of any man becoming a believer, but the potential of the believer in His house since sinful living and dead works that voids faith in Him would lead a believer as a vessel unto dishonour, but that believer has still the potential to repent before judgment falls on the House of God for once those doors are shut, those left behind at the rapture event are the vessels unto dishonour...unless they repent.. then as vessels unto honour in time for the Marriage Supper of the Lamb.

1 Peter 4:16Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf. 17For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? 18And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

2 Timothy 2:19Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. 22Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Thus when applied to verse ten of that same chapter:

2 Timothy 2:10Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

By being vessels unto honour as witnesses of Jesus Christ of His glory. It was not about obtaining salvation, but obtaining eternal glory also with salvation.
 
Jan 10, 2007
68
1
8
#14
Thadeas, your explanation denies the context of the passage in an apparent effort to defend God, or find a sociable answer for him when nobody has a right to question him with any judgmental aspect. Talk to Job about that one. Not cool. Seeking deeper understanding is one thing, but explaining away the plain sense of scripture by finding a more socially acceptable interpretation is entirely another. The context of Paul speaking about the potter and the clay is not flesh versus spirit. It's God's choosing before birth. He says that so unequivocally in Romans 9:11 that I'm amazed that this aspect is ever even debated. The context is that he told Moses he would have mercy on whomever he pleased, and harden the heart of whomever he pleased. The context of a vessel fitted to destruction is God saying that the only reason Pharaoh was ever born was so that God could harden his heart after all ten plagues and make an example out of him that would have the whole world talking about the power of the great I AM. This at the same time God was mercifully using the murderer Moses, to lead out a bunch of stiff-necked Israelites that didn't deserve anything they were being given. The context is that Paul was talking about vessels. The spirit is not a vessel. The flesh is a vessel; the spirit is what inhabits that vessel.

The issue of the same lump makes perfect sense without any issue to the plain sense of scripture. A potter does not go out the creek bed and collect just enough clay to make a single item, and return to his shop to make just that one item before returning to gather more clay for the next project. Even if the creek bed was mere feet from his back door it is still a waste of time to collect so little and to have to continually make separate trips for each lump. He collects a significant quantity of clay, a large "lump," and returns to begin making many vessels from that single lump. To say otherwise denies the entire context of Romans 9, much less the Old Testament scripture regarding Jacob and Esau.

As such it seems to quite a large stretch of not only the plain meaning of the text by itself, much less the context given in the surrounding verses. God makes men as he pleases just as potters make vessels as he pleases from the same lump. If God feels like it he can make Pharaoh and Moses from the same lump. Moses for the honor of being the chosen vessel to lead his people out of Egypt, and Pharaoh for the express purpose of hardening his heart and plaguing the Egyptians to show his glory to Moses, the Israelites, and people in time since that have been able to read the account.

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
2 Corinthians 11:3

As for your other question about denying God and being denied by God; space clearly does not afford a full answer, and it could possibly be getting off topic. There are plenty of threads dealing with OSAS and related topics. The man asked a simple question about whether or not God can hate one and love another and wanted scripture in response. I will provide a link to a couple of well written articles, out of which, I have been tempted to make a thread.

For the record, I’ve never studied the teachings of John Calvin. Other than looking up one quote in one of his books, I don’t know that I’ve ever read his teachings. Incidentally, I disagreed with that one quote that I looked up. Like many, I’ve heard much about him and seen his name thrown around as a label for a long time. How about you don’t call me a Calvanist and I won’t call you an Arminian. I’m a Christian and my only creed is the Bible. I’m not bound to or enamored with the teachings of any one man or group.

Standard disclaimers apply. I do not endorse everything that might be found on the following sites. I’m not even Baptist, much less any other denomination. That being said, I have found some rather thought provoking and well written articles of which I am sharing a couple. The first link mentions Arminians because it was written back in that age. The second is from a self-proclaimed former Arminian. I’m not passing this label to any reader, its simply the terminology chosen by the respective writers.

An Everlasting Task for Arminians, A Letter to Rev. Edward Smyth
http://www.libcfl.com/articles/task.htm

Bothersome Questions & Biblical Answers
http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/kohler/bothersom_questions.htm
 
Jan 10, 2007
68
1
8
#15
Baruch, if God decided to hate Esau and love Jacob based on foreknowledge then Romans 9:11 is meaningless.

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Romans 9:11

If it is foreknowledge then God did choose them based on foreknowledge of the works they would do after birth. God is so clear here that, again, I am amazed that it is even debated. It had absolutely nothing to do with their works. God said he chose them before birth so that nobody could claim it had anything to do with their works. He said it everything to do with God's purpose according to election.

So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Romans 9:16

"Not of him that willeth..."

WILL, noun. 1. That faculty of the mind by which we determine either to do or forbear an action; the faculty which is exercised in deciding, among two or more objects, which we shall embrace or pursue.

WILL, verb. 1. To determine; to decide in the mind that something shall be done or forborne; implying power to carry the purpose into effect. "...nor of him that runneth..."

“…nor of him that runneth…”

Without getting into detail it again can be easily seen that you run after or chase that which you seek. Its not about you seeking God. No man seeks God of their own accord (Ro 3:11). It’s about God drawing you to him and opening your eyes to understand spiritual things that no natural mind could ever comprehend, much less desire (1 Co 2:14).

One of the clearest passages I know on this matter:

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
Philippians 2:12-13

At first this passage appears to be going towards man’s sole responsibility but quickly the context makes it clear that it is all of God. Without God working in us we would never desire to do his will much less actually carry it out. Yes there is a work which we do. More specifically this working out of our salvation can be read as working it into every aspect of our lives. Working it out means, not keeping it a secret inside our hearts that nobody else ever benefits from, but working into an outwardly visible testimony for all to see. Praise God for him working in us both to will (choose) and to do (not merely hear and forget, but carry out) his good pleasure. Can we not rejoice in this unspeakable blessing?

I’m being brief on the predestination aspect of this question. The thread iss about whether God would choose to hate one and love another. That inevitably opens the predestination discussion topic but I’m doing my best not to let the thread get completely hijacked by something that is already rather heatedly discussed in various other threads. I hope that I have only delved into the predestination aspect deep enough to answer the underlying question without completely changing the subject but I apologize if that is not the case.

May God grant us the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him as we read his Word.
 
May 21, 2009
3,955
25
0
#16
God knows whose going to be evil before they are born.
 
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
#17
Thadeas, your explanation denies the context of the passage in an apparent effort to defend God, or find a sociable answer for him when nobody has a right to question him with any judgmental aspect. Talk to Job about that one. Not cool. Seeking deeper understanding is one thing, but explaining away the plain sense of scripture by finding a more socially acceptable interpretation is entirely another. The context of Paul speaking about the potter and the clay is not flesh versus spirit. It's God's choosing before birth. He says that so unequivocally in Romans 9:11 that I'm amazed that this aspect is ever even debated. The context is that he told Moses he would have mercy on whomever he pleased, and harden the heart of whomever he pleased. The context of a vessel fitted to destruction is God saying that the only reason Pharaoh was ever born was so that God could harden his heart after all ten plagues and make an example out of him that would have the whole world talking about the power of the great I AM. This at the same time God was mercifully using the murderer Moses, to lead out a bunch of stiff-necked Israelites that didn't deserve anything they were being given. The context is that Paul was talking about vessels. The spirit is not a vessel. The flesh is a vessel; the spirit is what inhabits that vessel.

The issue of the same lump makes perfect sense without any issue to the plain sense of scripture. A potter does not go out the creek bed and collect just enough clay to make a single item, and return to his shop to make just that one item before returning to gather more clay for the next project. Even if the creek bed was mere feet from his back door it is still a waste of time to collect so little and to have to continually make separate trips for each lump. He collects a significant quantity of clay, a large "lump," and returns to begin making many vessels from that single lump. To say otherwise denies the entire context of Romans 9, much less the Old Testament scripture regarding Jacob and Esau.

As such it seems to quite a large stretch of not only the plain meaning of the text by itself, much less the context given in the surrounding verses. God makes men as he pleases just as potters make vessels as he pleases from the same lump. If God feels like it he can make Pharaoh and Moses from the same lump. Moses for the honor of being the chosen vessel to lead his people out of Egypt, and Pharaoh for the express purpose of hardening his heart and plaguing the Egyptians to show his glory to Moses, the Israelites, and people in time since that have been able to read the account.

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
2 Corinthians 11:3

As for your other question about denying God and being denied by God; space clearly does not afford a full answer, and it could possibly be getting off topic. There are plenty of threads dealing with OSAS and related topics. The man asked a simple question about whether or not God can hate one and love another and wanted scripture in response. I will provide a link to a couple of well written articles, out of which, I have been tempted to make a thread.

For the record, I’ve never studied the teachings of John Calvin. Other than looking up one quote in one of his books, I don’t know that I’ve ever read his teachings. Incidentally, I disagreed with that one quote that I looked up. Like many, I’ve heard much about him and seen his name thrown around as a label for a long time. How about you don’t call me a Calvanist and I won’t call you an Arminian. I’m a Christian and my only creed is the Bible. I’m not bound to or enamored with the teachings of any one man or group.

Standard disclaimers apply. I do not endorse everything that might be found on the following sites. I’m not even Baptist, much less any other denomination. That being said, I have found some rather thought provoking and well written articles of which I am sharing a couple. The first link mentions Arminians because it was written back in that age. The second is from a self-proclaimed former Arminian. I’m not passing this label to any reader, its simply the terminology chosen by the respective writers.

An Everlasting Task for Arminians, A Letter to Rev. Edward Smyth
http://www.libcfl.com/articles/task.htm

Bothersome Questions & Biblical Answers
http://www.pbministries.org/Theology/kohler/bothersom_questions.htm
well I see you did like more calvanist though you couldn't help me with 2tim 2:10 thanks any how . you can call me anything you want sir, won't change the fact that God gave me a choice concerning Heaven or hell, life or death
 
B

Baruch

Guest
#18
Baruch, if God decided to hate Esau and love Jacob based on foreknowledge then Romans 9:11 is meaningless.

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Romans 9:11

If it is foreknowledge then God did choose them based on foreknowledge of the works they would do after birth. God is so clear here that, again, I am amazed that it is even debated. It had absolutely nothing to do with their works. God said he chose them before birth so that nobody could claim it had anything to do with their works. He said it everything to do with God's purpose according to election.

So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Romans 9:16
From that point of view, foreknowledge of works.. then yes, it would be pointless, but I was addressing foreknowledge of those that would seek Him as opposing those that prefer their evil deeds over Him.

How do you apply these verses below?

John 3: 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

One could say that God chose those people to come to the Light since no man can come to the Son unless it is the Father that draws him. John 6:44

But that doesn't explain the why for of those that do not come to the Light as if they did not care to have their evil deeds reproved. God foreknew that. Just as He foreknew those in Asia and Mysia would not receive Him, but someone in Macedonia would.

"Not of him that willeth..."

WILL, noun. 1. That faculty of the mind by which we determine either to do or forbear an action; the faculty which is exercised in deciding, among two or more objects, which we shall embrace or pursue.

WILL, verb. 1. To determine; to decide in the mind that something shall be done or forborne; implying power to carry the purpose into effect. "...nor of him that runneth..."

“…nor of him that runneth…”

Without getting into detail it again can be easily seen that you run after or chase that which you seek. Its not about you seeking God. No man seeks God of their own accord (Ro 3:11). It’s about God drawing you to him and opening your eyes to understand spiritual things that no natural mind could ever comprehend, much less desire (1 Co 2:14).
I accept that, but I do wonder about by God foreknewing whom would seek Him.. whom would recieve Him, and thus He would be enabling them to come to Him since they would need His help because of sin, thus those works can still be seen as manifested and wrought by God.

I still do not see Romans 9 as addressing unbelievers and believers as contrasted, but the elect of the believers as opposing the wayward believers... those that are sowing to the flesh and those fallen from the faith... vessels of honour so that the election stands as witnesses of Him as opposing the vessels of dishonour, thus showing the mercy of God by not how a man willeth nor how a man runneth.

One of the clearest passages I know on this matter:

Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
Philippians 2:12-13

At first this passage appears to be going towards man’s sole responsibility but quickly the context makes it clear that it is all of God. Without God working in us we would never desire to do his will much less actually carry it out. Yes there is a work which we do. More specifically this working out of our salvation can be read as working it into every aspect of our lives. Working it out means, not keeping it a secret inside our hearts that nobody else ever benefits from, but working into an outwardly visible testimony for all to see. Praise God for him working in us both to will (choose) and to do (not merely hear and forget, but carry out) his good pleasure. Can we not rejoice in this unspeakable blessing?
As God enables us to serve Him as He supplies the seed for the sower and water for the waterer, and as He is the One doing the actual work as no man can come to the Son unless the Father draws him as only God can cause the increase as only God may peradventure give them knowledge unto repentance to recover some of the wayward from the snares of the devil... then truly, this unspeakable blessing of His yoke being easy and His burden is light in the service as ambassaders goes to show how we shall live as His as well.. by faith in the Son of God.

Still, it is the Lord that chooses us and not we Him, as we can say that those He calls are those that hear and seek Him, but yet just as many are called, only a few are chosen for which that reference differentiates from the wayward believers.

So from one point of view, I can see yours, God choosing the elect, but from the other point of view, I can see why the wicked do not come to Him for they love their evil more than the Light... the result of God not choosing them by not drawing them to the Son, thus holding to your point? Mayhap, but why state the reason why they do not come to the Light by loving their evil deeds more than Him?

I’m being brief on the predestination aspect of this question. The thread iss about whether God would choose to hate one and love another. That inevitably opens the predestination discussion topic but I’m doing my best not to let the thread get completely hijacked by something that is already rather heatedly discussed in various other threads. I hope that I have only delved into the predestination aspect deep enough to answer the underlying question without completely changing the subject but I apologize if that is not the case.

May God grant us the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him as we read his Word.
As we all prophesy in part and know in part, I'm just glad that I believe, and that He has chosen me, God be willing, to come Home for the Marriage Supper.
 
Jan 10, 2007
68
1
8
#19
Forgive me Thadeas, perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. I said specifically that I was not giving a detailed answer to all of your other questions because of space constraints and, out of respect for the thread starter, not hijacking this thread to answer questions already being debated rather heatedly in several other threads.

Your specific question about 2 Timothy 2:10 is not that difficult. Pages could be taken to answer it in-depth or simply in only few words. I will try to fall into the second category to avoid hijacking the thread, but still take the time to sufficiently answer the question.

Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
2 Timothy 2:10

I already partially answered this question in my very first post by quoting

Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
2 Peter 1:10-11

God already made clear that he called, chose, elected, predestined, etc. Those are all Bible words. I didn’t make them up, I simply believe them. The question could be asked; Why make your calling and election sure? If God has chosen you then it’s a done deal right? Same question as; why endure anything for the elect’s sake if God is going to save them anyway? Different sides of the same coin. It also falls in the category of why preach the gospel at all if God has already chosen those that will be saved and promised to bring them in and preserve them. The short answer is, Because God said so. When you really get down to it, if it is completely up to the free will of every human being to choose based on the evidence, and arguments presented to them, then preaching is the most logical method you could devise to win the lost. Not just any preaching, but very well educated, extensively researched, eloquent, tailor made sermons. Not that I’m against any or all of those aspects, in and of themselves, but the Bible says that preaching in order to save the lost is foolishness.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1:18

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
1 Corinthians 1:21

Both the method and the message is counted foolishness to human reasoning, but we preach because God commanded us to go into all the world and preach. We preach because it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save those he pre-ordained to salvation. We endure all things for the elect sake because we know that the power is in God to save them.

If God told me today who I would someday marry, it wouldn’t matter if that person was an absolute heathen, someone I simply someone I didn’t get alone with, or an absolutely beautiful and amazing woman of God to the point of being out of my league (doesn’t take much). I could, by faith in God’s promise to give her to me as a godly wife, endure all things for her sake. I could by faith, wait on and possible be a vessel in facilitating her salvation. I could learn to get alone with her (whether by God changing her, me or both). Or I could, by faith, have confidence that God would make me a better man of God, and turn her heart toward me. My ability to endure any and all circumstances is not based in her having free will and me having to work everything out to convince her. My ability to endure all things is based solely in the knowledge that God promised to work it out and allows me to be a vessel in bringing about his eternal plan.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, “Absolute free-will proponents could stand to do a good study of Jonah and Nebuchadnezzar.” God told Jonah to go to Nineveh. Jonah said no. If God respects our free will and allows us to make the choice then that should have been the end of that conversation, and God would have moved on to the next person to see if he could get a yes from the next option and so on and so forth until he found someone “willing” to go. Instead we have the amazing story of God doing everything it took to turn Jonah around. Truth be told, that was the plan all along. The storm and whale was not plan b but what God had in mind all along to show us his divine sovereignty. The awesomeness of God is that he can give us a will, and intellect to use our will in a proper fashion, and yet still work in our circumstances to bring about his eternal will in our life, no matter how we feel about it initially. He can even give us “the desires of our heart.” When God gives us desires then our hearts desires are not the desires of his heart reproduced in ours. God pre-ordains all of our steps and yet we carry all of those out to the tiniest detail by our own choices.

A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.
Proverbs 16:9

Nebuchadnezzar is also an interesting story but I’m already getting too long in this post. The Parable of the lost sheep is also really amazing. My apologies to the thread starter if I’ve allowed the topic to stray to far from the original intent in the question that started this discussion. Back when I discussed and debated predestination more frequently and was still becoming grounded myself, I bookmarked over 300 verses for use in such discussions. Since then I’ve run across many more in various other studies and personal devotions. Not saying that to brag or lift myself up, just making the point that this topic could be discussed in depth for pages upon pages and still barely scratch the surface. Indeed, countless books for centuries even millennia have been written and it all comes down to this; without God giving us understanding of his word, nobody will ever truly learn anything. Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth is the scripture phrase that comes to mind. I’m not casting that out as an insult or rebuke to anyone here as I have many times been discussing a topic and convinced that I was right and the other side wrong only to have my understanding opened to the plain sense of scripture afterwards and see that I was in the wrong.

This is one reason I appreciate that this issur is so cut and dried when we simply humble ourselves to recognize the theme all through scripture: God is everything and in charge of all, while I am nothing and can do nothing apart from him. I can take no pride in wisdom that allowed me to see grace as amazing, to see myself as a horrible wretch, and to be granted heartfelt repentance. On the contrary, I had mental knowledge and respect of God’s power my entire life, but when God truly got a hold of me was when I was running the opposite direction, daily increasing my wretchedness. Praise God that he didn’t respect my choice to not obey him, but instead, like the good shepherd, went as far as it took, as long as it took, no matter what it took, to break me and bring me to repentance. No, I don’t question the methods of God and his grace; I simply praise him for it. I wouldn’t have picked me. I would have given up on me ages ago. Instead I live as a testimony to the unspeakable, longsuffering, grace of God.

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
John 15:16

Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
John 6:29

For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?
1 Corinthians 4:7

Praise God for him choosing me when I was saying no to him. Praise God for him doing the work in my heart to bring me to a saving belief and not mere mental ascent. Praise God that he has done all and left me with not the slightest thing of which to boast. Not my free will. Not my mental capacity to understand. Not my soft heart. All of him and none of me; Glory be to God!
 
A

awings7

Guest
#20
As God hated Esau and God loved jacob. why He do like that. Does He has any pratiality?

English translaters did not do a very good job with translationg form hebrew to english.

There is more than one word inthe hebrew for the word hate, as well as love, and sin,

It depends on the sentence structure and thought to be expressed what word is used.

The english doesnt make that distinction.

The use of the word hate as described of YHs attuide toward E is really YH reguarded E less than
Yacob, even the word esteemed less E than Yacob.

YH gave the same changes to E and E chose to worship idols.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.