We have more that unites us than divides us

[Quantrill]

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.

And you're free to believe whatever you like.

Again, (Mal. 1:1-3) is no metaphor. (Rom. 9:11-13) is no metaphor. But, again, you don't have to believe it.

According to your view, no one knows anything about the Bible. I suppose that makes you feel better.

I'll say it again. Christians have Jesus Christ in common. But it is the Jesus Christ of the Bible. Correct? And if it's Jesus Christ as revealed in the Bible, according to you, no one can really know anything.

Yes, there is but one Christ. But there are false Christ's. (Matt. 24:23-24) Just as there is one gospel. But there are false gospels. (Gal. 1:6-9) But, according to you, it doesn't matter because no one can really know anything about the Bible.

Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Do you believe God intended for us to understand what He wrote? (Rev. 1:3) (1 John 5:13)

As to the 'atonement', yes Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of the world. All of them. But, that doesn't mean everyone has their sins atoned. Jesus Christ provided the life and the blood. But if it is not applied then there is no salvation. Just like with the Passover in Egypt. God gave the specific rules to the condition of the lamb slain, to the application of the blood on the door posts and lintel of the house. (Ex. 12:1-28) So that when God passed over, if He saw the blood, He continued on. If He didn't see the blood, the first born of all the house was killed. (Ex. 12:12-13,23)

So it is with salvation today. Christ provided the life and blood. But the individuals faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Saviour is necessary to have that blood applied to himself. But what happens when one believes in a 'Christ' not revealed in the Bible? Answer: nothing. No salvation in putting faith into a false Christ.

Quantrill

 

[sdkidaho]

And you're free to believe whatever you like.

Thanks! America is great like that. Free to choose - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!

Again, (Mal. 1:1-3) is no metaphor. (Rom. 9:11-13) is no metaphor. But, again, you don't have to believe it.

According to you, yet I have seen others say otherwise. But... that is of course speculation, just like your opinion about those scriptures is your speculation. You saying that they are not metaphors, is not the end-all be-all of the discussion. Are you man? Are you fallible or infallible? Consider for a moment: you could be wrong.

And so could I. I could easily be wrong. Just. Like. You.

According to your view, no one knows anything about the Bible. I suppose that makes you feel better.

Nah - I never said that. That's a strawman tactic you're taking there, but I refute your claim. Thanks!

I'll say it again. Christians have Jesus Christ in common. But it is the Jesus Christ of the Bible.

Verses what other Jesus? I guess I'm unfamiliar with the other versions of the Savior. Christ is found in the Old and New Testament (The Bible). And again, I'm no expert, but I think He's even mentioned in the Koran, and other scriptures, yet if we mention any of them, some begin to have apoplexy. Still the same Savior though, as far as I know...

Yes, there is but one Christ. But there are false Christ's. (Matt. 24:23-24) Just as there is one gospel. But there are false gospels. (Gal. 1:6-9) But, according to you, it doesn't matter because no one can really know anything about the Bible.

False. Again you use a strawman tactic to try and put words in my mouth or to try and insinuate what my beliefs may or may not be. This seems to be right on the edge of veiled insult, but I've got thick skin and can see your statement for what it is.

Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God? Do you believe God intended for us to understand what He wrote? (Rev. 1:3) (1 John 5:13)

Ayup - I do believe the Bible is the Word of God. And yes, I do believe He intended for us to understand what He wrote and what He had others write. Hence the reason we are having this discussion at all. You hold fast to the claim that Jesus hated Esau, yet when you read the words of the Savior Himself, stating that His Father sent Him, many, many times, that conveniently is metaphor, simile, symbol, or allegory, etc. That's just one example of differing interpretations of scripture - there are many on many subjects in the Bible. I find it hard to believe you cannot see the irony in that line of thinking when being compared to this line of discussion about whether or not God hates certain individuals.

Overall, it seems so odd to me that a thread started for the purpose of finding common ground among individuals who believe in Jesus Christ, has turned into a negative debate. I'm not expecting to link arms and sing kumbaya, but holy crap - some of you just aren't happy unless you are pounding on someone else to let them know how they are wrong according to your beliefs and or interpretations of your beliefs. And lets be real, that's all any of us have, our own interpretations. You can keep saying that yours is fact, based upon the Bible, but so can everyone else who may or may not interpret various scripture verses the same way that you do.

As to the 'atonement', yes Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of the world. All of them. But, that doesn't mean everyone has their sins atoned. Jesus Christ provided the life and the blood. But if it is not applied then there is no salvation. Just like with the Passover in Egypt. God gave the specific rules to the condition of the lamb slain, to the application of the blood on the door posts and lintel of the house. (Ex. 12:1-28) So that when God passed over, if He saw the blood, He continued on. If He didn't see the blood, the first born of all the house was killed. (Ex. 12:12-13,23)

So it is with salvation today. Christ provided the life and blood. But the individuals faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and Saviour is necessary to have that blood applied to himself. But what happens when one believes in a 'Christ' not revealed in the Bible? Answer: nothing. No salvation in putting faith into a false Christ.

Correct, yet that Atonement is available to all - we get to choose whether or not we want to accept Him and His sacrifice. Isn't agency great?! He loved us so much that He left it up to each of us to choose what we wanted to do - follow Him, or not follow Him. I hope to, and try to follow Him. I am however, woefully inadequate.

I have no idea what happens when someone believes in a Christ that is not of the Bible. I've never heard of one of those. I believe there is but one Savior of the world - Jesus Christ. I can't say what every Christian denomination believes - there very well could be ones out there that believe there is a Jesus Christ that isn't associated with the Bible, I however, am not familiar with them.

 

[Quantrill]

Thanks! America is great like that. Free to choose - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness!


According to you, yet I have seen others say otherwise. But... that is of course speculation, just like your opinion about those scriptures is your speculation. You saying that they are not metaphors, is not the end-all be-all of the discussion. Are you man? Are you fallible or infallible? Consider for a moment: you could be wrong.

And so could I. I could easily be wrong. Just. Like. You.


Nah - I never said that. That's a strawman tactic you're taking there, but I refute your claim. Thanks!


Verses what other Jesus? I guess I'm unfamiliar with the other versions of the Savior. Christ is found in the Old and New Testament (The Bible). And again, I'm no expert, but I think He's even mentioned in the Koran, and other scriptures, yet if we mention any of them, some begin to have apoplexy. Still the same Savior though, as far as I know...


False. Again you use a strawman tactic to try and put words in my mouth or to try and insinuate what my beliefs may or may not be. This seems to be right on the edge of veiled insult, but I've got thick skin and can see your statement for what it is.


Ayup - I do believe the Bible is the Word of God. And yes, I do believe He intended for us to understand what He wrote and what He had others write. Hence the reason we are having this discussion at all. You hold fast to the claim that Jesus hated Esau, yet when you read the words of the Savior Himself, stating that His Father sent Him, many, many times, that conveniently is metaphor, simile, symbol, or allegory, etc. That's just one example of differing interpretations of scripture - there are many on many subjects in the Bible. I find it hard to believe you cannot see the irony in that line of thinking when being compared to this line of discussion about whether or not God hates certain individuals.

Overall, it seems so odd to me that a thread started for the purpose of finding common ground among individuals who believe in Jesus Christ, has turned into a negative debate. I'm not expecting to link arms and sing kumbaya, but holy crap - some of you just aren't happy unless you are pounding on someone else to let them know how they are wrong according to your beliefs and or interpretations of your beliefs. And lets be real, that's all any of us have, our own interpretations. You can keep saying that yours is fact, based upon the Bible, but so can everyone else who may or may not interpret various scripture verses the same way that you do.


Correct, yet that Atonement is available to all - we get to choose whether or not we want to accept Him and His sacrifice. Isn't agency great?! He loved us so much that He left it up to each of us to choose what we wanted to do - follow Him, or not follow Him. I hope to, and try to follow Him. I am however, woefully inadequate.

I have no idea what happens when someone believes in a Christ that is not of the Bible. I've never heard of one of those. I believe there is but one Savior of the world - Jesus Christ. I can't say what every Christian denomination believes - there very well could be ones out there that believe there is a Jesus Christ that isn't associated with the Bible, I however, am not familiar with them.

You can believe whatever you like no matter what country you live in. We are not interested in what America allows. We are interested in what the Bible says.

No, according to what a metaphor is. Is 'Jacob have I loved' a metaphor? No. Neither is ' Esau have I hated'. Who says otherwise and why? 'You could be wrong' is a poor argument. As I said, according to you everyone could be wrong. Thus the Bible means nothing.

You haven't refuted anything. Your only defense is, 'you could be wrong'.

I gave you verses. From Jesus Himself. (Matt. 24:23-24). Here is is more. (2 Cor. 11:4) And no, Jesus in the Koran or any other supposed writing from God, is not the same Jesus. He is another Jesus. A false Christ. Now you know.

No, my statement is not false. That has been your only argument. You say, 'Everyone has an interpretation. You can't know what the Bible says as language is different today. Could you be wrong?' You see. Like a cheesy defense lawyer.

No, God didn't have any others write any other Word. The Bible is the only written Word of God on earth. So, what other writings are you talking about that God wrote?

I have never said Jesus statement that the Father sent Him is a metaphor. So you can argue with others, whoever they may be, that say that, but I have never said that. Again, that is your argument. Some say this, some say that, so you can't know what to believe.'

To compromise what the Bible says; to compromise Who Jesus is, in order to find 'unity' is a false common ground. A lie about the Bible or presenting a false Jesus, is not common ground.

Well, now you know. Any who believe and follow a false Jesus are not saved.

Quantrill

 

[sdkidaho]

Ok.

 

[The_Duck_Master]

Ok.

Many believe discussions like this are harmful because it makes Christians look bad. I don't see it that way. Remaining silent empowers hate, not the other way around. You can't often change the heart of those who tend toward hate but you can strengthen the larger number of people who are watching silently on the sidelines. Continue to love and communicate with love. That is what we are called to do. The vast majority of theologians understand and teach that God cannot hate what he creates. He hates the sin but loves the sinner. Permanent, unending, infinite love.

 

[Quantrill]

Many believe discussions like this are harmful because it makes Christians look bad. I don't see it that way. Remaining silent empowers hate, not the other way around. You can't often change the heart of those who tend toward hate but you can strengthen the larger number of people who are watching silently on the sidelines. Continue to love and communicate with love. That is what we are called to do. The vast majority of theologians understand and teach that God cannot hate what he creates. He hates the sin but loves the sinner. Permanent, unending, infinite love.

Except you can't provide Scripture to support your opinion.

All you can provide is "Many believe". And, "The vast Majority". And, "I don't see it that way"

Poor references. All of what you present is based on 'you'.

Do those watching on the sidelines want to follow you or God?

Quantrill

 

[The_Duck_Master]

All you can provide is "Many believe". And, "The vast Majority". And, "I don't see it that way"

When I said "Many believe" and "I don't see it that way" it was not a response to you. Rather it was in reference to the fact that many see discussions like this as harmful. I don't believe it is because allowing hate and promotion of division by Christians to go unrefuted is not... Christian. If you were just concerned about whether God hated someone or not, I really wouldn't bother responding to you. That misunderstanding is between you and God. But that isn't really what you are doing here. It is division you seek. I don't cherish this discussion but I also won't shy away from it.

Except you can't provide Scripture to support your opinion.

You have been given many that you summarily dismissed. If you want additional scripture that explains God's nature beyond all of those already given, I recommend you start with Genesis 1:1 and read all the ensuing books. Focusing too much on one or two verses in particular is what is causing your misunderstanding.

Oh, and in spite of your insistence all Christians (all mankind actually) has more that unites us than divides us.

 

[Quantrill]

When I said "Many believe" and "I don't see it that way" it was not a response to you. Rather it was in reference to the fact that many see discussions like this as harmful. I don't believe it is because allowing hate and promotion of division by Christians to go unrefuted is not... Christian. If you were just concerned about whether God hated someone or not, I really wouldn't bother responding to you. That misunderstanding is between you and God. But that isn't really what you are doing here. It is division you seek. I don't cherish this discussion but I also won't shy away from it.



You have been given many that you summarily dismissed. If you want additional scripture that explains God's nature beyond all of those already given, I recommend you start with Genesis 1:1 and read all the ensuing books. Focusing too much on one or two verses in particular is what is causing your misunderstanding.

Oh, and in spite of your insistence all Christians (all mankind actually) has more that unites us than divides us.

Whether a response to me or not is immaterial. It shows the basis for your belief is you, not Scripture. 'Many believe', 'the vast majority', 'I don't see it that way'.

It's God who divides, not me. Scripture is clear, as I have shown. No misunderstanding here.

No, you have given me nothing concerning Scripture. You admit in post #(55) that you don't give Scripture. In post #(22) you refuse to give Scripture. In post #(28) you confess that the Bible is not the only source of revelation as a reason for refusing to give Scripture.

Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

Quantrill

 

[sdkidaho]

I see this as anti-division based scripture:

Matthew 18:21-22
21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.


And this scripture makes me wonder if I am being too prideful in a discussion like this, wanting to convince someone else of their errors in thought or knowledge or righteousness:

Matthew 25:40
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.


Which leads me to this scripture, which tells me that maybe I should focus more on myself, than on the perceived errors of others:

Matthew 7:4
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?


But there is still a discrepancy that we need to argue! Right...? That thought leads me to these verses, to help me consider more fully, what is my purpose here in this thread?

Matthew 22:37-39
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.


And in that, I find unity with others who believe that the above scriptures are the word of God. Even just going with Matthew 22:37-39, if I go with that alone, I don't have to worry if God hated Esau, because His commandment to me (us even) is to do what is found in Matthew 22:37-39.

 

[The_Duck_Master]

Out of curiosity I decided to explore the question further and try to discover what the great theologians had to say on the matter of God hating. I expected either St Augustine or St Thomas Aquinas to discuss the question and St Thomas Aquinas did so quite clearly in Summa Contra Gentiles Book 1 chapter 96 That God Hates Nothing

This apparently has been a matter of debate for quite some time.

CHAPTER XCVI—That God hates nothing

AS love is to good, so is hatred to evil; we wish good to them whom we love, and evil to them whom we hate. If then the will of God cannot be inclined to evil, as has been shown (Chap. XCV), it is impossible for Him to hate anything.

2. The will of God tends to things other than Himself inasmuch as, by willing and loving His own being and goodness, He wishes it to be diffused as far as is possible by communication of His likeness. This then is what God wills in beings other than Himself, that there be in them the likeness of His goodness. Therefore God wills the good of everything, and hates nothing.

4. What is found naturally in all active causes, must be found especially in the Prime Agent. But all agents in their own way love the effects which they themselves produce, as parents their children, poets their own poems, craftsmen their works. Much more therefore is God removed from hating anything, seeing that He is cause of all.188
Hence it is said: Thou lovest all things that are, and hatest nothing of the things that Thou hast made (Wisd. xi, 25).

Some things however God is said, to hate figuratively (similitudinarie), and that in two ways. The first way is this, that God, in loving things and willing their good to be, wills their evil not to be: hence He is said to have hatred of evils, for the things we wish not to be we are said to hate. So it is said: Think no evil in your hearts every one of you against his friend, and love no lying oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the Lord (Zach. viii, 17). But none of these things are effects of creation: they are not as subsistent 72things, to which hatred or love properly attaches. The other way is by God’s wishing some greater good, which cannot be without the privation of a lesser good; and thus He is said to hate, whereas it is more properly love. Thus inasmuch as He wills the good of justice, or of the order of the universe, which cannot be without the punishment or perishing of some, He is said to hate those beings whose punishment or perishing He wills, according to the text, Esau I have hated (Malach. i, 3); and, Thou hatest all who work Iniquity, thou wilt destroy all who utter falsehood: the man of blood and deceit the Lord shall abominate (Ps. v, 7).189
188God loves all the works of His hands antecedently. His first disposition to every creature is one of good will. This much these arguments may be said to evince. But how the will of God may stand to certain creatures consequently upon certain events, is not here considered.
189In this view, the wicked and their punishment form part of the order of the universe, one side of the eternal antithesis of good and evil. St Thomas’s exposition is succinct enough. Further elucidations must be sought from theologians; who, even when orthodox, are far from consentient here. Who has found the answer to Job’s question: Why then do the wicked live? (Job xxi, 7.)