SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : What about Mark 10:17-22

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
dfella
Member



Joined: 2010/7/9
Posts: 295
Canton, Michigan

 Re: Blaine

Blaine,

Thanks for sharing this portion and I would like to attempt to answer one of your statements. I totally agree that God loved this ruler even though he had chosen his own riches above God. I believe God is long suffering, forbearing, and patient, not willing that any should perish and know God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

But the statement that God only loves those whom He has chosen does not make sense to me and would like to speak to this. I hear and have heard this statement many times and must say again I believe, it is we, us, who determines whether we are chosen because God has given us the freedom to choose.

I said in the other thread, choice was given in the beginning in the book of Genesis in the garden. God told Adam and Eve that they could eat FREELY of every tree in the garden but were commanded not to eat of the tree in the midst of the garden. He tempered our freedom of choice with a command and because we are not puppets, computers, or robots but rather free moral agents God is not going to pull strings, or input only information that will yield His desire because He wants us to choose to love and obey Him, not force, or program us to.

We know that many are called but few are chosen. I know many say that it is God that does the choosing, but I do not believe that at all. We choose, we determine, God simply sees and knows our beginning and end before we are born.

God knew when He created the angels that 1/3 would rebel, but He still created them and that there are 2/3 who chose not to rebel. God knew when He created Adam and Eve that they too would disobey but He created them anyway. God knew that their sin of disobedience would pass upon all men but He created them anyway.

I brought up Hitler and Judas in the other thread, what is the difference between Adam & Eve, as opposed to Hitler, Judas, and all the rest of mankind? Mankind was not involved in the creation of Adam and Eve, however, Adam and Eve and the rest of mankind are and have been involved in the furtherance of creation.

Fallen humans begetting fallen humans who happen to have the freedom to choose.

While God saw that everything He created in the beginning was good, including man which He created in His own image, God knew, God did not cause, God did not choose, God did not predestine He just KNEW, that man would disobey Him.

While Gods love is sufficient and available to ALL He is not going to force it, manipulate it, determine it, or make the choice for us to choose it. I do not know any other way to say it or help others see how I see it in my own head.

We are FINITE, God is INFINITE. We do not have the ability to see both the beginning and the end, and personally I am VERY glad that that is the case.

There will be a day that will come when we see Him that we shall be like Him, we will only then SEE as He now sees and we shall know all things. When we look back we will be very amazed how simple His truth really was and is, and how difficult and complicated the devil our adversary made it.

I again go back to the question, does God STILL love those who have left this world and having rejected Him? If Hitler is in hell right now, do you still believe God loves Hitler? Or has Gods hatred been accounted to Hitler’s account because of Hitler’s choices?

Remember we are looking back in a PAST tense, not a present or future tense. If it were present or future, I would then not say God’s love would not be available to Hitler.

Going back to the scripture Psalm 5:5, It says that the fool will not stand in Gods sight and that He hates all workers of iniquity. It does not say He hates their works, He hates them. If it does not mean what it says, what does this verse mean?

When Jesus returns to this earth He is coming in wrath, judgement, and fury and will be taking firey vengeance upon all those who have rejected Him.

Wrath is not chastening. Wrath is not love. Wrath will be carried out on those who have rejected Christ, again they choose to reject and bring upon themselves this wrath.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

The wrath that this verse speaks of is an impending wrath which is determined by man, it is decided by man’s choice.

While we are still alive we can choose to turn from sin and see life and remove this wrath that is resting upon us because of our sin and rejection, if not, we bear the consequence. God will not be blamed.

Looking forward in the present and future tense I do not want to say God hates anyone, but if one chooses to rebel and reject Christ and end up in hell, they will run the risk of heaping Gods hatred upon themselves.

Once one is in hell what difference would it make to them whether God loves them or hates them at that point? Its an honest question.

BD


_________________
David Fella

 2016/12/3 10:33Profile
Heydave
Member



Joined: 2008/4/12
Posts: 1306
Hampshire, UK

 Re:

Blaine, I really don't have an issue with people posting about things that relate to Calvanistic theology, for or against. As I said on another thread, we should be able to discuss these things in a spirit of learning. What I am pointing out is the contradiction in you making a very big deal on a similsr topic started by Savannah that it should not have been allowed and folk should stop starting such discussions.

Your post here is clearly the same subject, but coming from the other side. But instead of posting into the original thread of Savannah's you started a new one, which in reality will just be a continuation of the other one. I'm ok with you doing this, but having done so you should not chastise others for posting on these or similar subjects. It gives the impression that it's ok to post your point of view, but wrong for others to post views that you disagree with!

BTW, I am not calvinistic in my theology, so not defending anyone here, in fact I probably agree with you on this issue, but that is not the point. We have to be consistent in our what we say and do.


_________________
Dave

 2016/12/3 11:33Profile
brothagary
Member



Joined: 2011/10/23
Posts: 1863


 Re:

its Hippocratic Dave thats what it is.....

could it be that it was Jesus humanity loving in this case we all talk about that in another context and agree that Jesus lived as a man and fulfilled the law as such

 2016/12/3 15:42Profile









 Re: Dave

Setting aside then the name of the theology. Does the New Testament teach that God loves only the sheep and not the goats? If He loves only the sheep then how does this explain His love for the rich young ruler who apoeared tp be acting like a goat?

-bbs-

 2016/12/3 16:15









 Re:

Quote:
its Hippocratic Dave thats what it is...



The Hippocratic Oath is an oath historically taken by physicians. It is one of the most widely known of Greek medical texts. In its original form, it requires a new physician to swear, by a number of healing gods, to uphold specific ethical standards.

 2016/12/3 16:34
Heydave
Member



Joined: 2008/4/12
Posts: 1306
Hampshire, UK

 Re:

So Mark, your sarcasm is ok is it when someone makes a spelling mistake? Or are you just picking on people because of what was posted on a different thread. That is very low brother! You should apologise.


_________________
Dave

 2016/12/3 16:46Profile









 Re:

Brethren some in this forim are implying, if not outright saying, that God loves only thise He has chosen. The sheep if you will. This will imply God hates those He has not chosen. The goats if you will.

So I ask again why does Jesus feel a love for the rich young ruler who turned away from His invite to follow Him.

-bbs-

 2016/12/3 17:00









 Re:

Is it possible the premise that God loves only the sheep but not the goats is not taught on the scriptures.

-bbs-

 2016/12/3 17:03









 Re:

Sorry Gary...forgive me for correcting your spelling but I thought it was funny to see that medical term and didn't think it would hurt to lighten things up brother:-) Umless of course you have thin skin but then I remembered you are an Aussie and can handle it:-)

Dave don't get your knickers in a knot brother, it's just the internet:-)

I stand by my comments though that we should not be disparaging brothers and sisters in Christ based on what rumors we read on the internet. Get to know them first then you can make a proper judgment...right?

 2016/12/3 17:12
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5373
NC, USA

 Re:

D. Fella-

I have tried in the past to accept the position that you take- that God can foreknow without influencing freewill.

This is a very deep subject and I tried to live with your explanation for a while until a gentleman on another forum explained logically how that is not possible. The reason that it is not possible is because God's foreknowledge would be perfect. Therefore, if he has foreknowledge that I will eat a peanut butter and onion sandwich for lunch tomorrow (delicious by the way) then by golly that is what I am going to have. It may FEEL like I am freely choosing to eat this, but if God has truly foreseen this then how could I be free to choose otherwise?

I suppose the answer may be that His ways are higher than our ways. Perhaps it has something to do with the multiverse and string theory and dark matter. But of course I don't understand that either.


_________________
Todd

 2016/12/3 17:28Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy