Featured Love requires choice?

Many men have chosen to live 30 years or more with an odious woman, Abraham Lincoln comes to mind. He chose to love his wife, even though she was a VERY difficult person to live with, many believe she suffered from mental illness.

That is a choice.

 

We are given command to love our wives men

Eph_5:25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,


We are commanded to love our enemies

Mat_5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,


We are commanded to love our neighbors in the same way we love ourselves

Mat_22:39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

We are commanded to love one an other as Christians

Joh_15:12 "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.

We are commanded to walk in love

Eph_5:2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.


We are commanded to do things out of love

Php_1:16 The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel.

The love of money is condemned

1Ti_6:10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils...

Heb_13:5 Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have, for he has said, "I will never leave you nor forsake you."


Young women were to be trained to love their husbands

Tit_2:4 and so train the young women to love their husbands and children,


Love is learned and perfected

1Jn_2:5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him:






Yep, love is a choice to be sure.

 

You know what I mean. Many good men choose to remain in a life of misery. Some for their love of God, some for their love of their children.

Let me rephrase, can you simply choose to love that which you find odious? No. Can you learn to? No.

Neither do you choose to find certain things lovely.

 

One is also told to love his persecutors. And the reason folks want to relegate love to the frigid realms of choice and emotionally neutral works, is because they cannot simply by taking thought turn on the feelings warmth and affection, especially for those who are persecuting not only themselves, but the ones for whom they do have warm, affectionate and tender feelings.

Love is not mere affectionate feeling , but it is not demonstrated without it.

One can will that into existence as easily as he can will pigs to fly.

 

But I believe you can. Many a man, and it works for women as well, obey God and be kind and considerate to their spouse, even though that person might be a real jerk. I knew a lady like this, and eventually her husband repented and accepted Christ and became a nice person who treated her well.

Yes, it can be difficult to feel affection for a person that is cruel and unkind, but it can be done. It is definitely something you can make up your mind to do.

 

'Someone' still only knows what Scriptures say, not what they mean, and then continues to pull Scripture out of context and pit Scripture against Scripture.

Jesus prophesied He would in fact be killed and be raised; Matthew 16:21; 17:23; Luke 9:22; Mark 9:31. If this didn't happen then Jesus would be a liar including the balance of the Triune God (God forbid that!). Jesus isn't saying what winman claims in Matthew 26:53. Not even close.

'Someone' accusing others of making Jesus a liar has, in fact, made Him one himself.

That a person can incessantly preach error and be reserved there is quite solemn to behold.

 

What an argument, scripture does not mean what it says! :laugh:

No, you have to let Calvinists interpret scripture for you, else you will never understand it. Only Calvinists understand scripture. Do not be alarmed when their interpretations seem to be the exact opposite of what scripture naturally seems to say. Just trust them.

You have to be an willing dolt to fall for stupidity like this.

 

preacher4truth

Yes.... many have seen this and commented on it:wavey: day after day...thread after thread:laugh:

.

yes...it is shocking:thumbs:

 

Act 7:59-60
59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

 

This has not a thing to do with Calvinist's, Calvinism, their interpretations or other ad hominem attacks i.e. 'dolt' 'stupidity'.

This has to do with your error.

Now that said keep in mind I knew your interpretation to be false and a fabricated myth due to the fact of what Jesus said prior. No Calvinist was consulted anywhere accept for this one who knows error (Hebrews 5:12-14) and knows the Word enough to see false teaching. In fact a babe in Christ who devours the Word would see your error instantly.

As to your 'what an argument Scripture doesn't mean what it says'. It means 'more' than it says at face value many many times as this is the nature of how God speaks.

But it is sad to say that whatever you say it means is exactly not what it says, means or implies. You've been in grave error for years and you remain there, many see it, but you cannot see it. This is another example of what Paul meant by rightly dividing the Word, a practice you are devoid of as many have pointed out over the years.

Now, let's get to right to the matter at hand: Why not deal with the texts which clearly contradict your interpretation of Matthew 26:53?

Frankly I'll put it this way, Jesus' own Words prove you to be a talebearer and a false teacher and I gave you the texts. In your theology Christ could've and can lie and what you've stated Matthew 26:53 says makes Him out to be one, which is a false interpretation that makes His prior statements lies, and also makes the entire prophecies, both in the OT and NT arbitrary grasps at what might happen instead of accurate predictions of what will happen. What a schizophrenic God that conveys!

To date you cannot deal with the texts at hand and have pitted Scripture against itself and your interpretation against even Christ's own word's.

 

I will let folks read Mat 26:53 for themselves and decide who is wresting scripture.

Mat 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

Is Jesus implying to Peter that he could pray to his Father, and his Father would send more than twelve legions of angels to rescue him or not?

If Jesus did not have option, would this be a truthful statement? Yes or no?

 

If in fact the passage of Matthew 25:63 were of your false interpretation the prophecies of resurrection via the OT and His statements of the same in the NT would be false, and God would be (God forbid) a liar.

And obviously you'd be good with that.

Why? Because you've expressed oft enough that this is exactly the type of god you serve; an arbitrary, capable of lying, non-omniscient, hit and miss bellhop at the whim of man's will, and schizophrenic being contrary to the revelation of Scripture.

The bottom line is you do not know what Scripture means and this has been shown to you time and again. You're like a concordance, you show what Scripture says and where it says it, but like a concordance you can never show what it really means. 1 Corinthians 2 comes to mind.

You fail miserably to understand the meaning of Scripture and remain a false and dissident teacher. Now, I do not know if this is via ignorance or something other, but nonetheless I pray that God may help you.

 

Your problem is that you have let other people tell you who God is and what God is like. So when you run into scripture like Mat 26:53 you can't handle it. Jesus plainly implies to Peter that if he so wished, he could pray to his Father at that very moment, and his Father would absolutely grant his prayer and send more than twelve legions of angels to rescue him. If everything is fixed in stone and Jesus had no option but to go to the cross, then this statement would be a lie. It would be impossible for Jesus to pray to his Father for rescue, and his Father would not send twelve legions of angels to rescue him.

The problem with you Calvinists is that when your theology disagrees with scripture, you cling to your theology and completely reject what the word of God says.

There is nothing difficult about this verse to understand, I am not twisting it or wresting it whatsoever. You simply cannot handle the truth.

 

From Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22:21, it's one harmonious book. The OT is chalked full of biblical prophecy, stating our Messiah would die. "He was numbered with the trangressors"(Isaiah 53:12)...."it pleased God to bruise Him"(Isaiah 53:10)....."He was wounded for our transgressions"(Isaiah 53:5)...then there's the story of the scapegoat in Leviticus 16, the male sheep and/or goat in Exodus 12....and any other time an animal was sacrificed, the ram who's horns were caught in the thicket(Genesis 22:13)....all these refer to Christ dying YEARS before He was crucified....

 

If Christ could lie and merely chose not to, how do any of us know if He told them, and us, the truth? You're undermining the bible....

 

In other words, he was changed.

There ya go. That's my point. The leopard cannot, by taking thought, change his spots.

No. One can make up his mind to do certain things, and say or not say certain things, but he cannot make up his mind to possess affection.

I turn you again to love's opposite. You never really decided to get angry at certain things. You just do, and you can sooner turn anger on and off as you can will pigs to fly.

But, I chose the example of an odious woman because of what the Scriptures say about her. The earth cannot bear up under her, let alone a man by taking thought. Insist otherwise all you want. It is not in the power of one's will to love that which he does not love already.

 

This is a beautiful passage. I didn't say that none loved their enemies. I said it isn't a matter of choice.

 

If Christ could sin, He could lie, and we're told it is impossible for God to lie.

 

That's a silly argument. So, Jesus did not have free will?

Now, I am asking you that, but I know Jesus did choose to be obedient. The scriptures say that about him over and over again. You cannot be obedient without option and choice.

Phi 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Isa 50:5 The Lord GOD hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away back.
6 I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting.

Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

Jesus wasn't a robot hard-wired so that he could not sin, he chose to obey his Father, he was obedient.

What would be the point in telling us he was not rebellious if he could not be rebellious? That would be meaningless. It would be no honor to be obedient if he could not be rebellious, if he was hard-wired like a machine.

You Calvinists have a very strange concept of God. He is not a person at all, but a stone monolith in your view.

 

Now, before all you Calvinists go haywire, here is a Calvinist who agrees with me.

http://www.alliancenet.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID559376_CIID2427866,00.html

I agree with this statement 100%.