Understanding God’s election

[Rufus]

Yes, and don't forget God's grace as revealed via general revelation.
Many OT passages such as those Rufus quoted portray God as causing all behavior, both good and evil!
Passing on vitriol is good, a sign of maturity and cooperative with Paul's commands not to argue.
HAND

Please explain how God is not morally culpable for the murder of his only Begotten Son, according to this passage:

Acts 4:23-28
23 On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 24 When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. 25 You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:

"'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
26 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the Lord
and against his Anointed One.'

27 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. 28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
NIV

If you need help in explaining this, feel free to consult with the smarty pants on this thread such as Studier or PT. After all, they were both smart and intelligent enough to embrace the Christian faith which they think is what makes the difference between them and the stupid people of the world who reject the truth. So...with all these smarts they have, they should be able explain how God isn't morally culpable even though His hand was in everything pertaining to Christ's life, ministry, death and resurrection -- just like it was in Joseph's life in the OT.

Will be looking forward to your thoughtful reply...

 

[studier]

Yes, and don't forget God's grace as revealed via general revelation.

Indeed, this is one part of the revelation I mentioned as being of God's vast grace.

 

[studier]

Many OT passages such as those Rufus quoted portray God as causing all behavior, both good and evil!

Yes, this is why I mentioned the interplay between God in His sovereignty and man in His God given will. It takes much more than one verse or even a few to find any sense of harmonization in this sense and maybe especially in this sense.

 

[studier]

@Rufus re: #11,717.

Pointed discussion > segue <> diversion - no resolutions.

So, I'm not reading past the first sentence or few.

 

[Rufus]

@Rufus re: #11,717.

Pointed discussion > segue <> diversion - no resolutions.

So, I'm not reading past the first sentence or few.

Of course, you're not. This is your usual modus operandi. Cop out whenever you have no answers. You have no answers for the most recent Sovereignty passages I either cited or quoted outright: Prov 16:1, 9; 19:21; 20:24; 21:30; Jer 10:23; Dan 5:23; Act 4:23-28, etc. Neither will you have any answers on Judgment Day when the Lord asks you:

God: Studier, why couldn't you take those scriptures at face value and implicitly trust in my goodness, holiness and righteousness instead of profaning my name and exalting dead men's intelligence, spiritual acumen and will power as being the ultimate difference between the saved and unsaved?

Studier: Duh...I don't know, Lord. It just seemed at the time that they were so few verses, and I wasn't capable of harmonizing them with the rest of scripture that teaches man's duty, obligation, responsibility and accountability to you, so I just ignored them and formulated my own theology since I also could not see mankind as being spiritually helpless and in need of your rescuing.

 

[GWH]

Maybe CC overstayed their visit and had to make good on past due parking tickets.

LOL! I wish someone would find out and explain what happened, though.

 

[Rufus]

LOL! I wish someone would find out and explain what happened, though.

It's certainly isn't the first time I've been unable to access CC. This problem is becoming habitual.

 

[GWH]

Please explain how God is not morally culpable for the murder of his only Begotten Son, according to this passage:

Acts 4:23-28
23 On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 24 When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. 25 You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:

"'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
26 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the Lord
and against his Anointed One.'

27 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. 28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
NIV

If you need help in explaining this, feel free to consult with the smarty pants on this thread such as Studier or PT. After all, they were both smart and intelligent enough to embrace the Christian faith which they think is what makes the difference between them and the stupid people of the world who reject the truth. So...with all these smarts they have, they should be able explain how God isn't morally culpable even though His hand was in everything pertaining to Christ's life, ministry, death and resurrection -- just like it was in Joseph's life in the OT.

Will be looking forward to your thoughtful reply...

I view it as a mystery that is not explained in Scripture and thus must await our enlightenment in heaven,
but I am confident that God's foreknowledge did not force people to choose evil. As I say on the website:

Omniscience includes knowledge of people’s thoughts (PS 94:11, MT 12:25) and the foreknowledge of events (ACTS 2:23, RM 8:29, 11:2, 1PT 1:2). Some people think that God even knows what a person will be/do before that person exists (JR 1:5). If this view is correct (which I find incomprehensible a la Kant), it must be maintained that God’s foreknowledge does not predetermine a person’s spiritual choice regarding the satisfaction of God’s requirement for salvation or else moral responsibility would be abrogated. I find it simpler to think that God merely tweaks the river of history occasionally to keep if flowing in the direction He intends but allows the fish to swim as they wish. God allows eddies in the river of salvation.

 

[GWH]

It's certainly isn't the first time I've been unable to access CC. This problem is becoming habitual.

Yes, it happened just last month I think, but not with the notice of being parked at Go Daddy.
I forgot what the reason was that someone gave.

 

[Rufus]

I view it as a mystery that is not explained in Scripture and thus must await our enlightenment in heaven,
but I am confident that God's foreknowledge did not force people to choose evil. As I say on the website:

Omniscience includes knowledge of people’s thoughts (PS 94:11, MT 12:25) and the foreknowledge of events (ACTS 2:23, RM 8:29, 11:2, 1PT 1:2). Some people think that God even knows what a person will be/do before that person exists (JR 1:5). If this view is correct (which I find incomprehensible a la Kant), it must be maintained that God’s foreknowledge does not predetermine a person’s spiritual choice regarding the satisfaction of God’s requirement for salvation or else moral responsibility would be abrogated. I find it simpler to think that God merely tweaks the river of history occasionally to keep if flowing in the direction He intends but allows the fish to swim as they wish. God allows eddies in the river of salvation.

But that doesn't stop you or even give you pause to put the brakes on formulating FWT even though you have no idea whatsoever how God's perfect will is perfectly compatible with fallen man's highly depraved and imperfect will.

And I suppose you can't explain the "mystery" contained in Gen 50:20 either?

And what I bolded in red you have totally backwards! If it weren't for God's predestination fallen sinners would never be able to satisfy God's requirement for salvation thereby fulfilling their moral responsibility by the sovereign grace of God. As far as the rest of the non-elect of this human race concerned, God was never morally obligated to save any man; therefore, He's free to leave most men in their state of depravity and death.

And God does not merely tweak the "river of history" since he's actively directing human history to serve HIS redemptive purposes. In the passages I cited or quoted where in the world is the idea that God operates on the mere fringes of human history!?

Finally, you FWs are equally clueless when it comes to understanding the nature of God's love. FWT posits a god who is merely a passive spectator who sits in the heavens wringing his hands, sweating bullets hoping that more people find him, trust in him, repent of their sins so that he can save them. Yet, this isn't the biblical picture of biblical love works! Biblical Love is PROACTIVE. Biblical Love takes charge -- just like God took charge of rescuing the helpless Israelities from Pharaoh, or like the Good Samaritan took charge when he rescued the half-dead crime victim he found on the road -- just like all Christ's disciples are supposed to take charge of situations with their proactive love that helps, ministers and cares for their neighbor and especially for other believers.

In fact, the very first concrete demonstration of God's love can be seen in Gen 3:15 when He sovereignly and graciously reconciled Eve to himself. Where is Eve's faith in the passage? Where was her repentance? Where is her confession of sin recorded? Where in the text is there anything positive said about Eve that would cause God to positively react to save her? God saved Eve solely on the basis of HIS GOOD PLEASURE! Eve serves as the template for the rest of the human race. God will have mercy on whom he wills, and will have compassion on whom he wills (Rom 9:15-16).

I suppose Gen 3:15, in your world, would also fall under the category of a great mystery to be revealed at the end of the age?

 

[GWH]

But that doesn't stop you or even give you pause to put the brakes on formulating FWT even though you have no idea whatsoever how God's perfect will is perfectly compatible with fallen man's highly depraved and imperfect will.

And I suppose you can't explain the "mystery" contained in Gen 50:20 either?

And what I bolded in red you have totally backwards! If it weren't for God's predestination fallen sinners would never be able to satisfy God's requirement for salvation thereby fulfilling their moral responsibility by the sovereign grace of God. As far as the rest of the non-elect of this human race concerned, God was never morally obligated to save any man; therefore, He's free to leave most men in their state of depravity and death.

And God does not merely tweak the "river of history" since he's actively directing human history to serve HIS redemptive purposes. In the passages I cited or quoted where in the world is the idea that God operates on the mere fringes of human history!?

Finally, you FWs are equally clueless when it comes to understanding the nature of God's love. FWT posits a god who is merely a passive spectator who sits in the heavens wringing his hands, sweating bullets hoping that more people find him, trust in him, repent of their sins so that he can save them. Yet, this isn't the biblical picture of biblical love works! Biblical Love is PROACTIVE. Biblical Love takes charge -- just like God took charge of rescuing the helpless Israelities from Pharaoh, or like the Good Samaritan took charge when he rescued the half-dead crime victim he found on the road -- just like all Christ's disciples are supposed to take charge of situations with their proactive love that helps, ministers and cares for their neighbor and especially for other believers.

In fact, the very first concrete demonstration of God's love can be seen in Gen 3:15 when He sovereignly and graciously reconciled Eve to himself. Where is Eve's faith in the passage? Where was her repentance? Where is her confession of sin recorded? Where in the text is there anything positive said about Eve that would cause God to positively react to save her? God saved Eve solely on the basis of HIS GOOD PLEASURE! Eve serves as the template for the rest of the human race. God will have mercy on whom he wills, and will have compassion on whom he wills (Rom 9:15-16).

I suppose Gen 3:15, in your world, would also fall under the category of a great mystery to be revealed at the end of the age?

Re "But that doesn't stop you or even give you pause to put the brakes on formulating FWT even though you have no idea whatsoever how God's perfect will is perfectly compatible with fallen man's highly depraved and imperfect will.": You should know by now that I choose to err on the side of believing God is all-loving--unless He is making be believe that.

Re "And I suppose you can't explain the "mystery" contained in Gen 50:20 either?": No, and I can't explain why you think God determines all behavior either.

Re "And what I bolded in red you have totally backwards! If it weren't for God's predestination fallen sinners would never be able to satisfy God's requirement for salvation thereby fulfilling their moral responsibility by the sovereign grace of God.": Yes, I recently began calling that "seeking grace".

Re "As far as the rest of the non-elect of this human race concerned, God was never morally obligated to save any man; therefore, He's free to leave most men in their state of depravity and death.": I also can't explain the mystery of why you choose to view God as hating the non-elect--unless He makes you believe such hate.

Re "And God does not merely tweak the "river of history" since he's actively directing human history to serve HIS redemptive purposes.": His POS may not require more than tweaking except in rare cases where miracle is needed.

Re "In the passages I cited or quoted where in the world is the idea that God operates on the mere fringes of human history!?": In the passages you did not cite where is the idea that God needs to micromanage every detail other than continuing the operation of physics?

Re "Finally, you FWs are equally clueless when it comes to understanding the nature of God's love. ": I think it borders on blasphemy to believe God does not love everyone. Christ's disciples are supposed to love their enemies.

Re "In fact, the very first concrete demonstration of God's love can be seen in Gen 3:15 when He sovereignly and graciously reconciled Eve to himself. Where is Eve's faith in the passage? Where was her repentance? Where is her confession of sin recorded?": Where is God's love for Adam?

Re "God will have mercy on whom he wills, and will have compassion on whom he wills (Rom 9:15-16).": Yes, and He wills to save everyone who repents and accepts Jesus as Lord. (1Tim.2:3-4) A mystery revealed to Paul (Rom.16:25, Eph.3:1-6).

 

[Rufus]

Re "But that doesn't stop you or even give you pause to put the brakes on formulating FWT even though you have no idea whatsoever how God's perfect will is perfectly compatible with fallen man's highly depraved and imperfect will.": You should know by now that I choose to err on the side of believing God is all-loving--unless He is making be believe that

No, you choose to err on the side of half truths and extremism.

Re "And I suppose you can't explain the "mystery" contained in Gen 50:20 either?": No, and I can't explain why you think God determines all behavior either.

See the passages I cited and/or quoted. Unlike you, I'm not making up anything. But you excel at making up lame excuses to reject God's truth.

Re "And what I bolded in red you have totally backwards! If it weren't for God's predestination fallen sinners would never be able to satisfy God's requirement for salvation thereby fulfilling their moral responsibility by the sovereign grace of God.": Yes, I recently began calling that "seeking grace".

How can any unregenerate person "seek grace" when no one seeks after God?

Re "As far as the rest of the non-elect of this human race concerned, God was never morally obligated to save any man; therefore, He's free to leave most men in their state of depravity and death.": I also can't explain the mystery of why you choose to view God as hating the non-elect--unless He makes you believe such hate.

You neither can explain or understand all the passages I have quoted or cited because you don't want to. You're content to buy into the lies of the evil one.

Re "And God does not merely tweak the "river of history" since he's actively directing human history to serve HIS redemptive purposes.": His POS may not require more than tweaking except in rare cases where miracle is needed. [/quote]

Salvation is a miracle. Since when is raising the dead not a miracle? Meanwhile you resort to mere speculation -- "may not require".. Read the passages I cited or quoted and show me where any of those texts qualify God's sovereignty.

Re "In the passages I cited or quoted where in the world is the idea that God operates on the mere fringes of human history!?": In the passages you did not cite where is the idea that God needs to micromanage every detail other than continuing the operation of physics?

You don't understand the difference between qualified and unqualified statements, do you?

Re "Finally, you FWs are equally clueless when it comes to understanding the nature of God's love. ": I think it borders on blasphemy to believe God does not love everyone. Christ's disciples are supposed to love their enemies.

I think it's very dishonoring to God to not believe the numerous "God hates" passages that I have often cited or quoted. You just merely swept them under the rug because those OT texts never caught up to the NT teachings.

Re "In fact, the very first concrete demonstration of God's love can be seen in Gen 3:15 when He sovereignly and graciously reconciled Eve to himself. Where is Eve's faith in the passage? Where was her repentance? Where is her confession of sin recorded?"

IOW, you have no answer. Another big divine mystery, heh?

Where is God's love for Adam?

You tell me. I never said God loved post-fall Adam.

Re "God will have mercy on whom he wills, and will have compassion on whom he wills (Rom 9:15-16).": Yes, and He wills to save everyone who repents and accepts Jesus as Lord. (1Tim.2:3-4) A mystery revealed to Paul (Rom.16:25, Eph.3:1-6).

Then God's will is being thwarted, which scripture teaches is impossible for anyone to do (Job 42:2)! Also, you interpret 1Tim 2:3-4 out of context. I have written my interpretation of this passage a few times to show everyone why it's out of context. You conveniently leave out v. 7 which QUALIFIES who the "all men" are that Paul had in mind, i.e. GENTILES to whom Paul was sent. Therefore, the "all men" cannot be interpreted as "all" w/o exception, since Paul omitted all Jews in the world in that particular passage.

And one more thing: How can God love all men when the vast majority of them are destined for hell and Christ never knew them (Mat 7:23)? How can God love anyone with whom he never had a personal, intimate, covenant relationship?

 

[studier]

@Rufus re: #11,717.

Pointed discussion > segue <> diversion - no resolutions.

So, I'm not reading past the first sentence or few.

Of course, you're not. This is your usual modus operandi. Cop out whenever you have no answers.

Updated:

Pointed discussion > segue <> diversion - no resolutions > ridicule for rejecting segue <> diversion from original discussion.

Well established procedure.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

No, true faith enters first into the new man through his new heart, not by his human ears nor mind. The heart of the old man is deceitful and desperately wicked above all things. Because it is evil, it does not/cannot teach natural man of things spiritual.


[Pro 16:23 KJV] 23 The heart of the wise teacheth his mouth, and addeth learning to his lips.

[Jer 17:9 KJV] 9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?

[Heb 8:10 KJV] 10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

[Rom 10:10 KJV] 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

LNo, true faith enters first into the new man through his new heart, not by his human ears nor mind.”

Yea that’s probably why he preached a word lol because it has nothing to do with Gods word being preached and heard and believed

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:13-14, 17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

There is no magical election of faith for some and not for others o dependent of his word offering fsith and salvation to everyone. Can’t be saved without hearing and bekieving the gospel that’s what creates faith in our hearts it goes through our ears onto our minds

 

[rogerg]

Yea that’s probably why he preached a word lol because it has nothing to do with Gods word being preached and heard and believed

It's okay, I really don't expect you to comprehend or accept this, but I thought I should say it anyway. So, no need to continue with this unless, that is, you feel like it.

No one can truly believe unless God has first given to them a new heart along with true faith. The only ones who will/can respond to the preaching of the true gospel, are those who have had faith placed into their spiritual hearts by God upon their salvation.
Did you not read the verses I provided? This is exactly what they are addressing. Read them closely, and if you can, think about what they are saying.

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved

The 'shall be saved" is in the future tense, not current tense. It is referring to the end of the salvation process on/of the last day at the end. It is not the same "saved" as becoming saved during our lifetimes - it is referring to exactly the same "saved" as Mat 10:22 is (and many other like verses) - it is of deliverance on the last day.

[Mat 10:22 KJV] 22 And ye shall be hated of all [men] for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:13-14, 17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

The "cometh" isn't in that verse; the hearing in view is spiritual hearing with spiritual ears, not human hearing with man's ears. As 10:18 informs us, many hear with human ears but to no avail. To manifest faith, it must first have been placed into the new man's new heart by God - it starts within the spiritual heart, over time manifesting and growing into the conscious intellect through spiritual hearing and comprehension of the gospel, but that hearing is not what gives birth to true faith; that is, it does not work in the reverse - true faith does not proceed from the intellect, going to the heart - only from the heart to the intellect. If it hasn't been placed into the new heart by God, then no matter how many times someone may hear the gospel, it will do them no good - they will never manifest true belief in the true gospel.

[Rom 10:18 KJV] 18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the
world.

[Mat 13:16 KJV] 16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.

[Rom 11:8 KJV] 8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.

 

[Rufus]

Updated:

Pointed discussion > segue <> diversion - no resolutions > ridicule for rejecting segue <> diversion from original discussion.

Well established procedure.

Update this passage and stick it in your hash pipe and puff on it:

Num 22:34-35, 38; 23:5-12
34 And Balaam said to the Angel of the LORD,"I have sinned, for I did not know You stood in the way against me. Now therefore, if it displeases You, I will turn back."

35 Then the Angel of the LORD said to Balaam , "Go with the men, but only the word that I speak to you, that you shall speak." So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.

38 And Balaam said to Balak, "Look, I have come to you! Now, have I any power at all to say anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that I MUST speak."

5 Then the LORD put a word in Balaam's mouth, and said, "Return to Balak, and thus you shall speak." 6 So he returned to him, and there he was, standing by his burnt offering, he and all the princes of Moab.

7 And he took up his oracle and said:

"Balak the king of Moab has brought me from Aram,
From the mountains of the east.
'Come, curse Jacob for me,
And come, denounce Israel!'

8 "How shall I curse whom God has not cursed?
And how shall I denounce whom the LORD has not denounced?
9 For from the top of the rocks I see him,
And from the hills I behold him;
There! A people dwelling alone,
Not reckoning itself among the nations.

10 "Who can count the dust of Jacob,
Or number one-fourth of Israel?
Let me die the death of the righteous,
And let my end be like his!"

11 Then Balak said to Balaam , "What have you done to me? I took you to curse my enemies, and look, you have blessed them bountifully!"

12 So he answered and said,"MUST I not take heed to speak what the LORD has put in my mouth?"
NKJV

Oh my, my. What to do? What to do? It appears that the Lord did some arm twistin', neck twistin' or something to "force" poor, hapless, helpless, puny, finite, fallible, sinful Balaam into submission and to get him to bless Israel instead of cursing the nation. Noticeably absent from this edited passage are any words by Balaam to the effect that "I will speak what the Lord has put in my mouth." It looks like God played the Big Bad Bully card on this pagan idolater. It doesn't sound like Balaam had any options open to him. It appears God won the battle of the wills.

So all you wanna-be deists who deep down really loathe theism, eat your heretical hearts out. You very likely hate theism so much that you FWs will ignore the NT passages that teach that all in the OT was written for our instruction or example (Rom 15:4; 1Cor 10:6, 11; Heb 4:11; 2Pet 2:6; Jude 7). Instead, you will all clutch tightly to your secret, unspoken love for deism, since you think God is only marginally (if even that!) involved with his free moral agents.

 

[GWH]

No, you choose to err on the side of half truths and extremism.

See the passages I cited and/or quoted. Unlike you, I'm not making up anything. But you excel at making up lame excuses to reject God's truth.

How can any unregenerate person "seek grace" when no one seeks after God?

You neither can explain or understand all the passages I have quoted or cited because you don't want to. You're content to buy into the lies of the evil one.

Re "And God does not merely tweak the "river of history" since he's actively directing human history to serve HIS redemptive purposes.": His POS may not require more than tweaking except in rare cases where miracle is needed.

Salvation is a miracle. Since when is raising the dead not a miracle? Meanwhile you resort to mere speculation -- "may not require".. Read the passages I cited or quoted and show me where any of those texts qualify God's sovereignty.

You don't understand the difference between qualified and unqualified statements, do you?

I think it's very dishonoring to God to not believe the numerous "God hates" passages that I have often cited or quoted. You just merely swept them under the rug because those OT texts never caught up to the NT teachings.

IOW, you have no answer. Another big divine mystery, heh?

You tell me. I never said God loved post-fall Adam.

Then God's will is being thwarted, which scripture teaches is impossible for anyone to do (Job 42:2)! Also, you interpret 1Tim 2:3-4 out of context. I have written my interpretation of this passage a few times to show everyone why it's out of context. You conveniently leave out v. 7 which QUALIFIES who the "all men" are that Paul had in mind, i.e. GENTILES to whom Paul was sent. Therefore, the "all men" cannot be interpreted as "all" w/o exception, since Paul omitted all Jews in the world in that particular passage.

And one more thing: How can God love all men when the vast majority of them are destined for hell and Christ never knew them (Mat 7:23)? How can God love anyone with whom he never had a personal, intimate, covenant relationship?[/QUOTE]

And so our disagreement continues and it comes down again to a bet I made previously: I bet God is all-loving and you bet He hates humanity except for the few elect.

(Hope to see you in heaven :^)

 

[Rufus]

Salvation is a miracle. Since when is raising the dead not a miracle? Meanwhile you resort to mere speculation -- "may not require".. Read the passages I cited or quoted and show me where any of those texts qualify God's sovereignty.

You don't understand the difference between qualified and unqualified statements, do you?

I think it's very dishonoring to God to not believe the numerous "God hates" passages that I have often cited or quoted. You just merely swept them under the rug because those OT texts never caught up to the NT teachings.

IOW, you have no answer. Another big divine mystery, heh?

You tell me. I never said God loved post-fall Adam.

Then God's will is being thwarted, which scripture teaches is impossible for anyone to do (Job 42:2)! Also, you interpret 1Tim 2:3-4 out of context. I have written my interpretation of this passage a few times to show everyone why it's out of context. You conveniently leave out v. 7 which QUALIFIES who the "all men" are that Paul had in mind, i.e. GENTILES to whom Paul was sent. Therefore, the "all men" cannot be interpreted as "all" w/o exception, since Paul omitted all Jews in the world in that particular passage.

And one more thing: How can God love all men when the vast majority of them are destined for hell and Christ never knew them (Mat 7:23)? How can God love anyone with whom he never had a personal, intimate, covenant relationship?

And so our disagreement continues and it comes down again to a bet I made previously: I bet God is all-loving and you bet He hates humanity except for the few elect.

(Hope to see you in heaven :^) [/QUOTE]

I don't think you'll be at home in heaven or in the restored Edenic Garden here on earth, since you won't have the freedom to choose to do evil. You'd end up being like God who cannot choose to sin -- and I suspect that would very likely be too much of a godly and tyrannical environment for you to handle.

 

[GWH]

And so our disagreement continues and it comes down again to a bet I made previously: I bet God is all-loving and you bet He hates humanity except for the few elect.

(Hope to see you in heaven :^)

I don't think you'll be at home in heaven or in the restored Edenic Garden here on earth, since you won't have the freedom to choose to do evil. You'd end up being like God who cannot choose to sin -- and I suspect that would very likely be too much of a godly and tyrannical environment for you to handle.[/QUOTE]

Aaah, so you also restrict God from being free.
So, who is the real tyrant?

 

[Rufus]

I don't think you'll be at home in heaven or in the restored Edenic Garden here on earth, since you won't have the freedom to choose to do evil. You'd end up being like God who cannot choose to sin -- and I suspect that would very likely be too much of a godly and tyrannical environment for you to handle.

Aaah, so you also restrict God from being free.
So, who is the real tyrant?[/QUOTE]

Well...can God sin? Can he lie? Can he deny himself?

And do you think anyone in New Eternal Order will be able to sin?