If God Loved everyone !

[RND]

What is "human [finite] blood" to a god?

I can't say but He thought it important enough to die for.

Anyway, the "life preserver" analogy doesn't work for one specific reason. If you throw out a life preserver to someone, they can see it, . . . swim to it, . . . cling on to it, and be pulled back to the boat.

Just as a man can see Jesus Christ on the cross, willing to die and take the abuse to save mankind. It is something we can behold.

Religion throws out. . . . words. . . often contradictory, . . many times debated within various christian denominations, with nothing concrete to actually grab onto.

No doubt that 'religion' does this, just not God.

Just the opinion of various people telling you what to see. And at the same time, many other religions have casted out their words.

How many have the power to transform?

And as with the latest threads in this thread, . . . . the analogy really should be stated as follows: [quote:1s3ogefc]The person holding the life preserver may or may not throw it to the person. . . . . he, first, has to actually LIKE the person enough to do so. . . . . . . . . .No, he would throw it to anyone. . . . Not the case. Only if the person loved him first. . . . Uh uh! It doesn't matter because anyone would be given the chance to grab on. . . . . . . You're wrong, the life preserver is only for those whom the thrower deems worth saving. . . . . . How can you say that? . . . etc....

[/quote:1s3ogefc]

The problem with this analogy is that it doesn't take into consideration that there are men and women that will gladly (it seems) put their lives on the line to save even people they "don't like."

Jesus did this:

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

The man that was wounded after killing those people at Fort Hood had rescuers that saved his life - even after he did what he did. The would have risked their own life to save his.

 

[Orion]

I can't say but He thought it important enough to die for.

It is just a bunch of chemicals. The "ever lasting" isn't made up of it, so why use it [finite chemicals] as the litmos test for the infinite? I know. . . you can't say. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency. But that's just my opinion.

Just as a man can see Jesus Christ on the cross, willing to die and take the abuse to save mankind. It is something we can behold. How many have the power to transform?

No, they don't SEE that. They have words written in a book. Besides, abuse on a cross, in the light of eternity, is but a vapor. Jesus was exhaulted, . . . he didn't "go to Hell" for us, which would be a true "taking my place". . . . according to christian doctrine.

 

[Orion]

Anyway, my point [my retelling of the analogy] was that there are two opposing viewpoints here, "whether or not god loves everyone", . . . and both sides believe they are right. . . .yet both sides would claim to have the holy spirit "leading them in to all truth".

 

[Veritas]

Anyway, my point [my retelling of the analogy] was that there are two opposing viewpoints here, "whether or not god loves everyone", . . . and both sides believe they are right. . . .yet both sides would claim to have the holy spirit "leading them in to all truth".

Yeah... but sometimes we people mess it up. And this is a complex philosophical issue so it's not suprising. I disagree with those who hold the position that there are only certain elect whom God loves, but I'm not going to say they're going to hell (not my judgement anyways)- not even close. I call them my christian brothers and sisters, I'd hope they'd do the same for me.

 

[RND]

I can't say but He thought it important enough to die for.

It is just a bunch of chemicals. The "ever lasting" isn't made up of it, so why use it [finite chemicals] as the litmos test for the infinite? I know. . . you can't say. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency. But that's just my opinion.

This is true. It is just your opinion. This is why spiritual things don't belong to you nor can be understood by you.

1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

No, they don't SEE that.

The evidence are all the changed lives of everyone that has turned to Christ.

They have words written in a book.

That's right. Waaaay better than a Tony Robbins best seller.

Besides, abuse on a cross, in the light of eternity, is but a vapor.

That's only if you were to believe Jesus didn't rise from the tomb.

Jesus was exhaulted, . . . he didn't "go to Hell" for us, which would be a true "taking my place". . . . according to christian doctrine.

Jesus died not only the first, but second death on the cross.

 

[Orion]

The 1Cr 2:14 passage is exactly what I'm talking about. People make a HUGE assumption that they ARE receiving this "spiritual discerment", . . . and they believe what they are saying whole heartedly, believing they received it, . . . when their belief contradicts ANOTHER person's belief which THEY believe they recieved it via "spiritual discernment". This specific topic isn't the only topic this happens on. And when we are debating something that should be a paramount topic, . . . why the debate at all? There should BE no debate if people ARE "spiritually discerning" things! This is my point.

Um, . . .I thought that "the second death" was one that damns people to Hell for all of eternity. How did Jesus pay this one? He didn't spend any significant time there. "TODAY, you will be with me in paradise."

 

[RND]

The 1Cr 2:14 passage is exactly what I'm talking about. People make a HUGE assumption that they ARE receiving this "spiritual discerment", . . . and they believe what they are saying whole heartedly, believing they received it, . . . when their belief contradicts ANOTHER person's belief which THEY believe they recieved it via "spiritual discernment".

This is when we search the Holy scriptures for truth.

This specific topic isn't the only topic this happens on. And when we are debating something that should be a paramount topic, . . . why the debate at all? There should BE no debate if people ARE "spiritually discerning" things! This is my point.

You know, I quoted 1 Cor 2:14 because of your lack of discernment.

Um, . . .I thought that "the second death" was one that damns people to Hell for all of eternity.

Not in my Bible it doesn't. Death is death.

How did Jesus pay this one? He didn't spend any significant time there. "TODAY, you will be with me in paradise."

How can I share spiritual things with you? You aren't spiritually imbued.

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Heb 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Jesus Christ paid the price for our sins. Christ died for us, in our place. He paid the penalty of death that we should have paid, so that by faith in His atoning death and resurrection we might live forever with Him in victory over the law of sin and death. That is the good news, the Gospel message that the Bible teaches in verity.

It could not be the first death because believers who accept Christ still have to die the first death. Paul says in 2Timothy 1:7-10 that Christ, through the cross, has abolished death. If He abolished death why do Christians die? Because He abolished only the second death, not the first death. Revelation 20:6 shows that those who have part in the first resurrection (e.g. believers), on such the second death has no power. Why? Because there was one who was willing to taste it and go through it for us.

 

[Orion]

Not good enough to "search the scriptures". Opposing viewpoints HAVE scripture to back up their claims. Let's say that you dissagree with another christian who has scripture to back up their claim, . . . and you have scripture to back up yours. Both parties believe their theology to be spiritually discerned and sound. Who is right?

So, where is this sacrifice. . . when a god becomes a god again, and has millions worship him? Would he have done the same for humanity if no one chose to thank him [a truly selfless act of love]?

 

[glorydaz]

There is no greater love than this...

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

And who did Christ die for?

For ALL.

Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

For every man.

But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

For the sins of the whole world (NOT FOR OURS ONLY)

And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

For the ungodly.

For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

Even for false teachers.

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

For many (Matthew 20:28).
For Israel (John 11:50-51).
For the Church (Eph. 5:25).
For "me" (Gal. 2:20).

God's love is sufficient but not always efficient since some turn away to their own destruction.
There is no limit to the love of God...just as there is no limit to His justice.

 

[savedbygrace57]

daze askd:

And who did Christ die for?

For ALL.

He died for His church eph 5:25

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

He did not die for the devil nor his children or seed..

 

[glorydaz]

daze askd:

And who did Christ die for?

For ALL.

He died for His church eph 5:25

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

He did not die for the devil nor his children or seed..

Ah, I see you like a few verses, but not all of them.
Do you only want part of the truth or the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory:

Ah, I see you like a few verses, but not all of them.

I think the same of you..

 

[shad]

So, in other words, . . . your side is correct and the other side is "woe-fully missing the boat". However, they feel the same about your side. They firmly believe that THEY are right as well. Do you not see the problem? There is only opinion. IF your holy spirit was actually active in "relaying truth", there wouldn't be an argument about "whether god loves everyone or not".

I know what you are saying. Only God knows if we are serving God with all our might. But you will have confidence if you are in line with God. I dont worry about what others say about my walk with God.

We will have spiritual blessings in our lives if we are in line with God.

I will keep on serving and expressing my convictions for the Lord.

.

 

[glorydaz]

glory:

Ah, I see you like a few verses, but not all of them.

I think the same of you..

I believe every verse.
What I've tried to point out is that God hates the sin and not the sinner.
I'll point again to what God hates...
He hates the feet that run to sin...
Does that mean He hates feet?

If you read enough of the Bible, you'll see many instances where it can't be read like the books we have today. Another example would be a scripture that speaks of the feathers of God. Does that mean He actually has feathers? No, it's a word picture. This is why we need to compare scripture with other scripture...not just lean on our own understanding when considering individual verses.

I gave a list of verses that say specifically who Christ died for and you pick out the one verse.
It's important to look at every verse, and then decide what is actually being said.

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory says:

I believe every verse.

at least thats what your mouth says..

 

[jasoncran]

whatch the attacks!
do i knew your heart, and do you know mine. it one thing to question doctrine and another to claim another is NOT a beliver via some minor doctrinal disagreements or even large ones,unless they are purely heritical, this topic is no that type.
keep in mind that the the verse regarging esau could mean that he didnt hate but didn't choose him ,is it consisent with his nature.

when we rebel we lose blessings, and this may be what happen to easu, he choose the world over god, did god love him less, now but he couldnt use him. think of this verse.

many are called , but few are chosen.

 

[savedbygrace57]

glory says:

I believe every verse.
What I've tried to point out is that God hates the sin and not the sinner.

and you reject scripture that i have pointed out that says god doesnt love all sinners ps 5:

5The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

 

[savedbygrace57]

whatch the attacks!
do i knew your heart, and do you know mine. it one thing to question doctrine and another to claim another is NOT a beliver via some minor doctrinal disagreements or even large ones,unless they are purely heritical, this topic is no that type.
keep in mind that the the verse regarging esau could mean that he didnt hate but didn't choose him ,is it consisent with his nature.

when we rebel we lose blessings, and this may be what happen to easu, he choose the world over god, did god love him less, now but he couldnt use him. think of this verse.

many are called , but few are chosen.

God Loved jacob and hated easu before they did any good or evil..rom 9:

11(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;)

 

[jasoncran]

then why the cross if the lord hate the workers of inquinity, werent we all before the cross, i think that verse means that he is displeased and those who dont repent are subject to his wrath, because of his holiness, look at the book of ezekiel 37, i think its there, the lord takes no joy in the death of the sinner. and doesnt peter say that lord wants us all to come to repentance, he endureth much, but he's not slackful as men count slackfullness, in the time appointed the lord will come.

 

[jasoncran]

first are you a calvinist
second, he selected jacob before esau, that what that verse means, because he( the lord) being ominpotent knows who will follow him, but will allow us to choose. esau made his choice, and the lord knew this. that's why he choose jacob.

was jacob perfect, no jacob lied to and decieved easu to get the birthright from him and then theres the blessing from isaac that he stole as well.

do you believe in free choice to reject the lord's calling?
this concept is mystery partially.

how does calvinsim relate to this verse
whomsoever will come,let him come.

we can come to the lord,because he draws us and we choose to follow.