We have more that unites us than divides us

[Quantrill]

As I said previously, it's not the Bible I don't believe, it's your interpretation of the words. For you to continually argue otherwise as you have done just shows your arrogance. You may not agree with others' interpretation, but that doesn't make your interpretation correct.

Someone else already explained Jacob and Esau in this thread and I have repeatedly explained many times to you that God loves all he creates. But since you apparently can't infer what perfect love means... If God loves all he creates he most certainly loves Jacob (and Esau). He loves ALL he creates.

To review what was previously explained to you, each passage in the Bible needs to be understood under the context of which it was intended... the story about Jacob and Esau is not about God hating Esau, rather it is understood to be an exhortation to remain steadfast in faith. Esau abandoned God for worldly comforts when faced with discomfort and is therfore separated from God. It is a charge to be steadfast in faith, regardless of what we face in the world. Also, as I previously explained, "hate" has many meanings. Again, God creates out of perfect love and therefore cannot hate what he creates which means that the way "hate" is used in that context is NOT the way you interpret it. God loves all that is good, never creates anything not good and therfore loves all he creates forever.

Again, you miss the forest for the trees out of a desire to divide.

I don't agree with what perfect love means by your definition when your definition runs contrary to the Bible. You say God most certainly loves Esau even though the Bible, (Mal. 1:1-3) is clear that God hated Esau. Hate in (Mal. 1:1-3) is in total contrast with 'love'. Thus it's meaning is clear.

To you, I guess then 'love' must not mean 'love' in (Mal. 1:1-3)..correct? God must not have loved Jacob. He must have just said that to show His pleasure in Jacob's steadfastness in faith. The problem with that is that there was nothing in Jacob to love. Jacob was a deceiver from the get go. So, according to you, if God didn't really hate Esau, then God really didn't love Jacob. If your going to reflect hate away from the person of Esau, then you must reflect love away from Jacob's person also.

Thus your view continues to run contrary to the Bible. For Paul is clear in (Rom. 9:11-13) that God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born. "(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 yournger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."

I am happy to stay out of your forrest.

Quantrill

 

[The_Duck_Master]

I don't agree with what perfect love means by your definition when your definition runs contrary to the Bible. You say God most certainly loves Esau even though the Bible, (Mal. 1:1-3) is clear that God hated Esau. Hate in (Mal. 1:1-3) is in total contrast with 'love'. Thus it's meaning is clear.

To you, I guess then 'love' must not mean 'love' in (Mal. 1:1-3)..correct? God must not have loved Jacob. He must have just said that to show His pleasure in Jacob's steadfastness in faith. The problem with that is that there was nothing in Jacob to love. Jacob was a deceiver from the get go. So, according to you, if God didn't really hate Esau, then God really didn't love Jacob. If your going to reflect hate away from the person of Esau, then you must reflect love away from Jacob's person also.

Thus your view continues to run contrary to the Bible. For Paul is clear in (Rom. 9:11-13) that God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born. "(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 yournger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."

I am happy to stay out of your forrest.

Quantrill

Again, I think you miss the point by focusing on verse 13. It is setting up an exhortation to submit to God's will in the following verses... That we are not God and cannot comprehend his will.

14" What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So it depends not upon man’s will or exertion, but upon God’s mercy. 17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for the very purpose of showing my power in you, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills."

Because God cannot contradict himself and creates with love he cannot hate the same way we understand the meaning of the word. Hate in this case must therfore be a metaphor for being separated from God. It is not hate in the way you infer. All the verses in the Bible must be understood within the whole.

 

[Quantrill]

Again, I think you miss the point by focusing on verse 13. It is setting up an exhortation to submit to God's will in the following verses... That we are not God and cannot comprehend his will.

14" What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So it depends not upon man’s will or exertion, but upon God’s mercy. 17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh, “I have raised you up for the very purpose of showing my power in you, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy upon whomever he wills, and he hardens the heart of whomever he wills."

Because God cannot contradict himself and creates with love he cannot hate the same way we understand the meaning of the word. Hate in this case must therfore be a metaphor for being separated from God. It is not hate in the way you infer. All the verses in the Bible must be understood within the whole.

No. Again, you make no sense. The will of God demonstrated in (Rom. 9:11-13), which you should submit to, is that God chose before the children were born. And this is proven in the choosing between Jacob and Esau. Jacob was loved, but Esau was hated.

This removes all your claims that God just hates Esau's sins. It was the person of Esau that God hated even before they were born.

Once again, you use your opinon of God to define Scripture. There is nothing here that contradicts God. Scripture is clear throughout that God loves and hates. It just contradicts your man made opinion of God,because Scripture is clear that God hated Esau.

And, you continue to ignore that if God did not really hate Esau, then He must not really love Jacob. You ignore it because you don't want to question 'love'. Because 'you' agree with that. In other words, you just write your own bible. Make it say what you want. You don't believe the Bible. You don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. Which is why you need a different one.

Quantrill

 

[The_Duck_Master]

No. Again, you make no sense. The will of God demonstrated in (Rom. 9:11-13), which you should submit to, is that God chose before the children were born. And this is proven in the choosing between Jacob and Esau. Jacob was loved, but Esau was hated.

This removes all your claims that God just hates Esau's sins. It was the person of Esau that God hated even before they were born.

Once again, you use your opinon of God to define Scripture. There is nothing here that contradicts God. Scripture is clear throughout that God loves and hates. It just contradicts your man made opinion of God,because Scripture is clear that God hated Esau.

And, you continue to ignore that if God did not really hate Esau, then He must not really love Jacob. You ignore it because you don't want to question 'love'. Because 'you' agree with that. In other words, you just write your own bible. Make it say what you want. You don't believe the Bible. You don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. Which is why you need a different one.

Quantrill

Tim Staples who is a former protestant minister, and who converted to the Catholic faith, explains well what I have been saying and what billions of Catholics AND protestants believe about God hating.



While I suspect that you will discount what the Catholic Church teaches, I am stating the understanding of billions of Christians, both Catholic and non - catholic.

You are free to disagree but you are not free to claim your understanding is "correct" while mine is not.

 

[Quantrill]

Tim Staples who is a former protestant minister, and who converted to the Catholic faith, explains well what I have been saying and what billions of Catholics AND protestants believe about God hating.

While I suspect that you will discount what the Catholic Church teaches, I am stating the understanding of billions of Christians, both Catholic and non - catholic.

You are free to disagree but you are not free to claim your understanding is "correct" while mine is not.

I have not said my understanding is correct and yours is wrong.

I have said Scripture is against your 'understanding'. I have presented Scripture that proves it. You present nothing but your opinion about God that you use to accept or reject Scripture with. If Scripture agrees with your opinion about God, you accept it. If it disagrees with your opinion about God, you reject it. You say it says that, but really doesn't mean that.

Scripture clearly shows God divides. And I have given plenty of Scripture to prove it. But you reject it. Because your idea of God is to unite, not divide.

Scripture clearly shows that God does hate. And I have given Scripture to prove it. But you reject it. Because your idea of God is to love and not hate.

Quantrill

 

[sdkidaho]

I don't agree with what perfect love means by your definition when your definition runs contrary to the Bible. You say God most certainly loves Esau even though the Bible, (Mal. 1:1-3) is clear that God hated Esau. Hate in (Mal. 1:1-3) is in total contrast with 'love'. Thus it's meaning is clear.

To you, I guess then 'love' must not mean 'love' in (Mal. 1:1-3)..correct? God must not have loved Jacob. He must have just said that to show His pleasure in Jacob's steadfastness in faith. The problem with that is that there was nothing in Jacob to love. Jacob was a deceiver from the get go. So, according to you, if God didn't really hate Esau, then God really didn't love Jacob. If your going to reflect hate away from the person of Esau, then you must reflect love away from Jacob's person also.

Thus your view continues to run contrary to the Bible. For Paul is clear in (Rom. 9:11-13) that God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born. "(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 yournger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."

I am happy to stay out of your forrest.

Quantrill

Malachi 1:1-3

You are saying that God literally hates Esau. So if I follow you correctly, you are taking scripture verse at face value, and saying there is no room whatsoever for interpretation, correct?

Verse 3: And I hated Esau...

Seems pretty straight forward, right?

Does every term, phrase or word, used back in that timeline, mean the same thing that those same terms, phrases or words mean in our timeline today?

If your answer is no, then do you believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ are one and the same being, or are they two separate beings? Many believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are indeed one and the same, and many believe they are three separate entities, or beings or however you want to classify that.

If we interpret scripture literally, as you are with Malachi 1:1-3, are not God the Father and the Jesus Christ two separate beings?:
John 3:16-17
John 6:57
Genesis 1:26
Colossians 3:17
John 15:21

There are more references if needed.

My point isn't to derail the subject at hand, but to point out that if you are indeed going to leave zero room for interpretation, that you would need to do so with every verse in the Bible, not just when it suits to make a point in a disagreement on the internet.

I'm no theologian. I'm no scripture expert. I love to debate (argue) a point to death. I think that has become a character flaw. I think the world has enough contention and hate and that it doesn't need me to add to it. I try to avoid that, and often fail miserably. I'll keep trying though. Why? Because I want to follow the Savior and His perfect example. I don't believe that His intent was ever for me to "hate" anything but sin.

If I can find common ground with others who love the Savior, I believe I can be a better man.

 

[sdkidaho]

You have titled this thread, "we have more that unites us than divides us". I have asked you before, what is it that unites us? I don't remember an answer. So, what is it that unites us?

Quantrill

The Savior.

 

[The_Duck_Master]

I have not said my understanding is correct and yours is wrong.

I have said Scripture is against your 'understanding'. I have presented Scripture that proves it. You present nothing but your opinion about God that you use to accept or reject Scripture with. If Scripture agrees with your opinion about God, you accept it. If it disagrees with your opinion about God, you reject it. You say it says that, but really doesn't mean that.

Scripture clearly shows God divides. And I have given plenty of Scripture to prove it. But you reject it. Because your idea of God is to unite, not divide.

Scripture clearly shows that God does hate. And I have given Scripture to prove it. But you reject it. Because your idea of God is to love and not hate.

You have titled this thread, "we have more that unites us than divides us". I have asked you before, what is it that unites us? I don't remember an answer. So, what is it that unites us? Maybe I should ask, who is us?

Quantrill

I have repeatedly answered those questions. The video in the original post also answers those questions (if you ever bothered to watch it). Only an open heart to his will can help you understand.

"This is why I speak to them in parables, because ‘they look but do not see and hear but do not listen or understand."

 

[Quantrill]

Malachi 1:1-3

You are saying that God literally hates Esau. So if I follow you correctly, you are taking scripture verse at face value, and saying there is no room whatsoever for interpretation, correct?

Verse 3: And I hated Esau...

Seems pretty straight forward, right?

Does every term, phrase or word, used back in that timeline, mean the same thing that those same terms, phrases or words mean in our timeline today?

If your answer is no, then do you believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ are one and the same being, or are they two separate beings? Many believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are indeed one and the same, and many believe they are three separate entities, or beings or however you want to classify that.

If we interpret scripture literally, as you are with Malachi 1:1-3, are not God the Father and the Jesus Christ two separate beings?:
John 3:16-17
John 6:57
Genesis 1:26
Colossians 3:17
John 15:21

There are more references if needed.

My point isn't to derail the subject at hand, but to point out that if you are indeed going to leave zero room for interpretation, that you would need to do so with every verse in the Bible, not just when it suits to make a point in a disagreement on the internet.

I'm no theologian. I'm no scripture expert. I love to debate (argue) a point to death. I think that has become a character flaw. I think the world has enough contention and hate and that it doesn't need me to add to it. I try to avoid that, and often fail miserably. I'll keep trying though. Why? Because I want to follow the Savior and His perfect example. I don't believe that His intent was ever for me to "hate" anything but sin.

If I can find common ground with others who love the Savior, I believe I can be a better man.

No, Scripture is saying that, in two places. (Mal. 1:1-3) (Rom. 9:11-13)

The literal interpretation of Scripture allows for metaphors, similes, symbols, allegories, etc. etc. But that doesn't mean everything is a metaphor, or that you can just interpret things you don't like metaphorically. And (Mal. 1:1-3) is no metaphor.

If you want to start a thread on the Trinity, go ahead. I will participate.

No, I just said that the literal interpretation of Scripture allows for metaphors, similes, symbols, allegories, etc. If a simile is used, then it is interpreted as such. If something is a symbol then it is interpreted as such. If something is an allegory, it is interpreted as such. For example: (Gal. 4:21-31) See verse (24). But that allegory is based upon the literal historical events concerning Abraham's two sons and their mothers. And, that which the allegory portrayed is to be taken literally also. See (28-31)

Why would you want to debate and argue if you don't know the Scripture? I'm not saying God wants you to go out and hate someone. I am saying that Scripture is clear that God does hate. He is a God of love, of course. Because He is a God of love, He must hate those things that want to destroy that which/whom He loves. We should hate the things God hates.

As believers, our common ground is Jesus Christ. But, the Jesus Christ of the Bible. The Bible is where we learn about Jesus Christ. Correct? The Bible is the Word of God. Correct. The Bible is the only written Word of God on earth. Correct? So if the Bible says God divides, then God divides, and if the Bible says God hated Esau, then He did.

Quantrill

 

[sdkidaho]

I believe you are incorrect in your interpretation.

As I read this thread, you seem to claim the high ground by stating that what you are saying is fact from the Bible and not just your interpretation thereof. I think that is where much of this debate has come from - who is interpreting what. You claim ultimate truth because your interpretation is fact from the Bible, but oh by the way, other scripture can easily be interpreted differently through metaphor, simile, symbols, allegory, etc... That just seems far too convenient - for your interpretation. Even when you've given the answer yourself, you never seem to apply that answer, to yourself: "But that doesn't mean everything is a metaphor, or that you can just interpret things you don't like metaphorically. And (Mal. 1:1-3) is no metaphor." It only seems to apply to everyone else with an opposing view.

Words and phrases from the time of the Bible do not mean the same as they do in our day, that is a fact. Men interpreting the Bible, and doing so incorrectly has been happening since the Bible was written and will continue long after all of us are gone (unless the Lord returns in our lifetimes). The interpretation of man has lead to the formation of hundreds, if not thousands of Christian churches across the globe. All of them have some truth, some have more truth than others, some have less truth than others - all due to the interpretation of man and the understanding, or lack there of, of scripture and Gods will.

Having said all that - your interpretation doesn't have to be a thorn in my side, or anyone elses. Why? Because you aren't going to the be the one who judges me on judgement day. You and I and everyone else can disagree on points of scripture and doctrine, but ultimately, the Lord will be there and know our hearts and judge us perfectly. What a HUGE blessing and relief that is, to not have to worry about being judged by someone who isn't qualified to judge (that most certainly includes me as being unqualified). That doesn't mean I can't have my own beliefs, or form my own thoughts about any given topic. It doesn't mean that my opinions don't matter on any given subject - we can all have value - just how much value is where I can leave it to the Lord to decide.

I'll say it again - what Christians have in common, is Jesus Christ. There is only one Jesus Christ, not many. He is the Redeemer of the world. He is the Savior of the world. He atoned for the sins of everyone who has ever been on this world, is on this world, or will be on this world.

Good luck in your disagreement in this thread about how there is more to unite us than there is to divide us. I think you're wrong in your point of view.