The eternal purpose of Christ pt2

[savedbymercy]

Yep, and so are the Chronicles of the OT:

1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

So what is your point?

All scripture is profitable 2 Tim 3:16 ! The Psalms are scriptures Lk 24:44-45 !

 

[BrotherJoseph]

NO, I am saying because of their context they are not relevant.
Come now, BJ, would you pray this prayer:

Psa 109:10 Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.

How relevant is that to our NT prayer life?

How relevant is some of the other OT scripture to this discussion:
1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

Scripture taken out of context is not relevant. It is inspired, yes; but not relevant.

Brother DHK,

How can you say those Psalms are not relevant when Paul tells us, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine" (2 Timothy 3:16)? Also, please answer, do you believe those Psalms are "irrelevant" because it is untrue or "irrelevant", but true?

 

[PreachTony]

How can you say those Psalms are not relevant when Paul tells us, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine" (2 Timothy 3:16)? Also, please answer, do you believe those Psalms are "irrelevant" because it is untrue or "irrelevant", but true?

I'm not DHK, but if I might respond...

It's not that they are not relevant. They simply are not relevant to most conversations. Many scriptures, especially in the OT, are relevant only to historical study of the things going on in that particular book or chapter. To try to say that a prayer written by a man 1000 years before Christ and concerning the actions of another man is of utmost relevance to modern day Christians is shortsighted. Like the quoted verse from Chronicles...it has meaning in the events of the time, but it's stretching to find overly strong meaning to even first century Christians, much less modern day Christians.

 

[SovereignGrace]

dhk



Only In Christ Jesus, for it is written Rom 8:39

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Outside of Christ He is a consuming fire Heb 12:29

29 For our God is a consuming fire[Thats His Nature also].

The Love of God here is with the definite article, meaning its exclusive to only in Christ Jesus, the Love of God is found, there is no scripture foundation that God is Love to any outside of Christ Jesus !

I have said this several times now. Good luck getting him to agree.

 

[DHK]

All scripture is profitable 2 Tim 3:16 ! The Psalms are scriptures Lk 24:44-45 !

I never said that the Psalms were not inspired and or profitable. Where did I say such a thing?

Again, consider:

1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

How is it relevant (as Tony explained) to this discussion. It isn't.
Neither 1Chron.26.18 relevant to this discussion. If it is would you mind explaining how?

 

[savedbymercy]

I never said that the Psalms were not inspired and or profitable. Where did I say such a thing?

Again, consider:

1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

How is it relevant (as Tony explained) to this discussion. It isn't.
Neither 1Chron.26.18 relevant to this discussion. If it is would you mind explaining how?

The Psalms teach that God hates the workers of Iniquity Ps 5:5 ! That's proof that He doesn't Love them!

 

[SovereignGrace]

Do you not find it odd that you can only find those type of statements in:
a. Poetical literature, particularly the Psalms which are the prayers of men--and mostly statements of judgment as in the Imprecatory Psalms, which then have no bearing on us at all.

b. that the same truths are not found in the NT books and actually contradict the words of Jesus, and of the Apostles.

c. They also contradict the Law, which is summarized by Jesus into two Great Commandments summarized by Christ in the NT.

d. They go directly contrary to the nature of God who expressly is stated as "God is love," (the absence of hate).

Given the above evidence I find your positon to be absolutely wrong, even anti-biblical.

Look, those prayers of David are the same as if the Spirit said them. The Spirit, through David, is saying God hates the workers of iniquity and that God is angry with the wicked.

The reason why we are to love our enemies is we are not God, not holy, although we are commanded to 'be holy even as He is holy'.

You have God hating the wicked 50% of the time one day, 100% of the time another another day, 63% of the time another day.

Look, every sunrise is a new day TO US. To Him, there is but one eternal day, seeing He alone is Eternal.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I never said that the Psalms were not inspired and or profitable. Where did I say such a thing?

Again, consider:

1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.

How is it relevant (as Tony explained) to this discussion. It isn't.
Neither 1Chron.26.18 relevant to this discussion. If it is would you mind explaining how?

Who was the first one to throw 1 Chr. 26:18 into this discussion?

 

[SovereignGrace]

Also, 1 Chr. 26:18 has to do with gate keeping. Stop deflecting. If you want to debate gate keeping, start a new thread about it and we will discuss it.

 

[PreachTony]

The Psalms teach that God hates the workers of Iniquity Ps 5:5 ! That's proof that He doesn't Love them!

And at one time we were all sinners (workers of iniquity), so apparently God hates/hated all of us.

 

[SovereignGrace]

And at one time we were all sinners (workers of iniquity), so apparently God hates/hated all of us.

Alrighty then...answer this. When Christ drank that bitter cup, God poured His holy wrath upon His only Son, even unto death. Did God hate His Son?

 

[DHK]

Look, those prayers of David are the same as if the Spirit said them. The Spirit, through David, is saying God hates the workers of iniquity and that God is angry with the wicked.

The reason why we are to love our enemies is we are not God, not holy, although we are commanded to 'be holy even as He is holy'.

You have God hating the wicked 50% of the time one day, 100% of the time another another day, 63% of the time another day.

Look, every sunrise is a new day TO US. To Him, there is but one eternal day, seeing He alone is Eternal.

I answered your post, but I don't see response to it.
Here is a part of it:

Verse 10 simply teaches that God is his shield.
Verse 11, if there is NT teaching, is what I have already given:
God hates the wickedness of the unbeliever. Vengeance is His. He will repay.

In the ESV it says:
Psa 7:11 God is a righteous judge, and a God who feels indignation every day.
--The KJV may not be the most accurate translation at this point. God does not hate "the wicked" but rather their wickedness.

(ASV) God is a righteous judge, Yea, a God that hath indignation every day.

(Darby) God is a righteous judge, and a *God who is indignant all the day.

In fact Young's literal translation seems to say the opposite of the KJV:

(YLT) God is a righteous judge, And He is not angry at all times.


Therefore, don't put all your faith in just one translation.

God isn't angry with the wicked at all. Not according to that verse. Do some more study.

As for Heb.12:29, I am amazed someone like yourself would even consider it.
You (Calvinists) seem to pull a phrase here and a phrase there.
Here a phrase, there a phrase,
Everywhere a phrase, phrase..

Icon starts it out with a disjointed "God is angry with the wicked every day," half of one verse without a reference.
Now it is added to with "God is a consuming fire," a disjoint from verse 28 of Hebrews 12. Just keep stringing them together without ever looking at the context.

Yes, I was the one who first used 1Chron.
1 Chronicles 26:18 At Parbar westward, four at the causeway, and two at Parbar.
--Why? Because it has about as much relevance and meaning to the verses you guys keep pulling out of context. Without context there is no real meaning.
God is not angry with the wicked every day. That is not what the verse even means. Study it out.

As far as Heb.12:29,
First, it gives the impression that you view God more like the Muslims view Allah--not as a God of love, but as aloof, impersonal, of Judgment, Almighty, and ready to condemn. There is no mercy here. He is a consuming fire. You have indeed neglected the context and ignored who God really is. It is atrocious how you depict the nature of God on this thread.

Heb 12:28 Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:
Heb 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire.
--The author is using the first person plural "we" indicating himself. He, as a believer is speaking of the Kingdom. Let us have grace whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.
God is a loving God. We are to serve him out of grace in reverential and godly fear or respect--not half-hazardly.

The "consuming fire" is a metaphor, just like Jesus is "the door," the "vine," etc.
W. MacDonald says:

12:29 God is a consuming fire to all who refuse to listen to Him. But even to His own, His holiness and righteousness are so great that they should produce profoundest homage and respect.

It is a simple metaphor in that the author is speaking to believers that as we worship the Lord it should be with great reverential fear or respect. Respect is the proper modern word.

But the Calvinist of today whips this KJV word out of context and makes it seem as God is an angry old man ready to condemn all in sight. Pitiful!

 

[BrotherJoseph]

I'm not DHK, but if I might respond...

It's not that they are not relevant. They simply are not relevant to most conversations. Many scriptures, especially in the OT, are relevant only to historical study of the things going on in that particular book or chapter. To try to say that a prayer written by a man 1000 years before Christ and concerning the actions of another man is of utmost relevance to modern day Christians is shortsighted..

BrotherPreachTony,

The verse wasn't concerning the "actions of another man", but clearly references "all workers of iniquity". Here it is again, "thou hatest all workers of iniquity." (Psalm 5:5). Is this true or false Brother PreachTony? The other verse also is not concerning the "actions of another man", but the writer explicitly states he is referring to, " the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth (Psalm 11:5). He is referring to the wicked (plural), what verses in either chapter indicate he is referring to a man singular?

 

[BrotherJoseph]

And at one time we were all sinners (workers of iniquity), so apparently God hates/hated all of us.

PreachTony,

The phrase "workers of iniquity" refers only to the nonelect is evident by how the phrase appears all 21 times throughout the Bible. See https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=workers+of+iniquity&qs_version=KJV

Read through all those passages and find an instance in which it clearly applies all men. You will not be able to.

Christ made it clear it applies to those who are dammed when he used the same phrase in Luke 13:27, "But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity" This phrase is never used in the KJV in reference to those who were elected unto salvation.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Alrighty then...answer this. When Christ drank that bitter cup, God poured His holy wrath upon His only Son, even unto death. Did God hate His Son?

At that time yes the Father did hate His Son because he was "made sin". He was "made a curse". "...being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:" (Galatians 3:13). He was "forsaken" by the Father. God does not poor out his wrath on objects he loves. This was the only way for the reconciliation to take place.

 

[PreachTony]

Look, those prayers of David are the same as if the Spirit said them. The Spirit, through David, is saying God hates the workers of iniquity and that God is angry with the wicked.

So every Bible verse then is 100% relevant to every conversation of every day? They simply are not. This does not weaken the scripture. It reveals instead that different scriptures have different applications to us.

The reason why we are to love our enemies is we are not God, not holy, although we are commanded to 'be holy even as He is holy'.

This is some odd logic, SG.

You have God hating the wicked 50% of the time one day, 100% of the time another another day, 63% of the time another day.

Arbitrary application of numbers. As has been shown across the varying interpretations, that verse does not apply an eternal hatred of God toward the wicked. Seeing as we were all wicked at one time, if God eternally hates the wicked, then God eternally hates us all.

Look, every sunrise is a new day TO US. To Him, there is but one eternal day, seeing He alone is Eternal.

No one would argue that. Trying to apply the human understanding of time to God is impossible.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Brother DHK,

A simple question for you, are Psalm 5:5 and 11:5 true? Yes or no. (I would agree with you that verse you cited in Chronicles is true).

 

[savedbymercy]

And at one time we were all sinners (workers of iniquity), so apparently God hates/hated all of us.

God loved some sinners Rom 5:8

 

[Iconoclast]

Though it is not a caricature, why should I stop? The truth of your theology is that God has Elected a number, great though it may be, to salvation and likewise elected a number, greater than the first, to eternal damnation. You can try to say that Election only works one way, but that simply cannot be in the case of a sovereign God as Calvinism describes Him. If God has selected to save those He saves, then He must also have selected to punish those He punishes. Man has no says so in either case, according to you, so man is nothing more than a puppet. I hate using that cliche, but it is apt, given the theology.

Can you show where the scriptures indicate God "elected" a greater number or indeed any to damnation......if you cannot....then you have a problem with God.....not my theology.

Also I asked you in post 9 I think it was....could you explain your understanding of the biblical doctrine of election?

 

[SovereignGrace]

At that time yes the Father did hate His Son because he was "made sin". He was "made a curse". "...being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:" (Galatians 3:13). He was "forsaken" by the Father. God does not poor out his wrath on objects he loves. This was the only way for the reconciliation to take place.

Bingo! People say God loves everybody, but then poured His wrath out on His Son. The One who after being baptized His voice rang from heaven “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”[Matt. 3:17] Then His Son, who He poured His wrath upon said “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me."[Jn. 11:41b,42a] Then right before God finished slaying His only Son Jesus stated “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”[Lu. 23:46b]

God does not hate the wicked but hated His Son after He 'became' sin? Something just does not jive with their theology.