Robert Haldane oon Ro.9:13

[Rippon]

Aside from the Bible itself which is in a category not to be compared with any other book -- of uninspired literature , I value Robert Haldane's Exposition of Romans very highly . He spends 13 pages on Romans 9:13 . I will give glimpses of his take on God's hatred .

If God's love to Jacob was real literal love , God's hatred to Esau must be real literal hatred .

If God says that He hated Esau , are we to avoid receiving God's testimony , or justified in employing a mode of torture in expounding His words ?

The opinion held by some , that it may be questioned whether God be ever said to hate any man , is contrary to the revealed character of God . This sentiment appears to be near akin to that of the heathen philosophers , who held it as a maxim that God could not be angry with anyone . Like many other unfounded dogmas , it stands in direct opposition to the whole tenor of the Scriptures ...

Nothing can be more unjustifiable than this method of tampering with and perverting the word of God , and nothing can be more uncalled for ... In God's hatred of sinners , as in all His attributes , there is nothing of sinful feeling ... We must in this , and in all things , submit to God's word , and believe it as it speaks , and not as we would have it to speak .

 

[Helen]

oh help. Can't Bible explain Bible? Paul is quoting Malachi which is explained in Obadiah. Maybe that is too much Bible for you?

Of course God can be angry and hate -- even people. But there is nothing in the Bible that says He hates all people who are not born again! His hate is directed at those who persist in evil, who are purposefully and consistently wicked -- and especially towards those who prey on others. If you trace the references to each of the quotes Paul uses back to where he picked them up, this becomes abundantly clear.

"For God so loved the world..." Do you think this refers to the mountains and the plains?

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Rippon:
The opinion held by some, that it may be questioned whether God be ever said to hate any man, is contrary to the revealed character of God. This sentiment appears to be near akin to that of the heathen philosophers, who held it as a maxim that God could not be angry with anyone.

It's the Santa Claus god. He always brings presents no matter what he says he'll do if you're bad.

I originally meant this as just a silly reply, but unfortunately I do think that our view of the Bible has been corrupted by Santa Claus, other fairy tales, the declaration of independence, Benjamin Franklin quotes, liberal culture, and so on.

People read the Bible through the lens that it is self-evident that God created everyone equal. But the Bible doesn't say that anywhere. In fact, it contradicts that kind of thinking everywhere.

 

[Rippon]

A greater snare cannot be laid for your piety and your judgment , than that which consists in making love His paramount or His only perfection ... it must be comfortable to have a god who is divested of all that is frowning and indignant towards transgressors , and clothed with all that is compassionate and kind. Whenever there is a soft or a sentimental temperment at work , that representation of the Divine nature must be peculiarly pleasing and acceptable ... this partial and unscriptural view of the character of God adopted as the leading principle of certain systems of theology , but it is held and cherished and acted upon by multitudes , whose sole concern inmatters of faith is to have not what is true , but what is agreeable , and who find in the tenet we are speaking of , the most soothing and satisfying of all persuasions , -- that God loves every one of His creatures with such an affection... I warn you against the delusion ...so destructive of that mystery of godliness and of grace which has been made known to us in Jesus Christ .

 

[Helen]

As far as I can see, you are trying to knock down a straw man. Who here is saying God only loves and is a Santa Claus in the sky? I have not seen that from anyone.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Helen:
As far as I can see, you are trying to knock down a straw man. Who here is saying God only loves and is a Santa Claus in the sky? I have not seen that from anyone.

It's not a straw man. Its the fatal flaw that makes you believe in free will. You can't imagine or accept a God who would not offer salvation to everyone and give everyone an equal chance at heaven. You can't imagine or accept a God who would choose from before the foundation of the world only SOME people, and not others. That doesn't fit your picture of a loving, fair, righteous, whatever, God.

So you refuse to see what's written in black and white and make up fairy tales to explain away what scripture plainly says.

 

[Helen]

I don't have to imagine it. I simply believe what the Bible says. He said He loved the whole world, and that He is not willing that ONE should perish. Paul states that all have heard and that no one has an excuse. We are told over and over in the Bible to seek God and not harden our hearts. God invites us to reason with Him. We are told to simply believe.

All I have to do is believe what is written to know that God is not as Calvinism presents Him.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Helen:
I don't have to imagine it. I simply believe what the Bible says. He said He loved the whole world, and that He is not willing that ONE should perish. Paul states that all have heard and that no one has an excuse. We are told over and over in the Bible to seek God and not harden our hearts. God invites us to reason with Him. We are told to simply believe.

All I have to do is believe what is written to know that God is not as Calvinism presents Him.

"We are told to simply believe."

You're living in the world of Peter Pan. That's not what God meant when He said we must believe. God meant to trust Him and lean not on our own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight.

Right now your paths are a tangled mess. You're not trusting Him. Trusting Him means not having to mangle the meaning of His words because if you read them right you just might find out that He's not the kind of God you thought He was.

He's even better than you think He is, but you'll never find that out. You refuse to leave your fairy tale world of "God is not willing that any perish, and by any, he meant any man who ever lived, lives or will live". It doesn't matter that your private interpretation of the what He means by the word "world" (and "all", and "any", and all the other flimsy foundations upon which your conclusions above stand) contradict the plain and simple meaning of so many other scriptures.

You refuse to leave your world of the fairy tale God who loves everyone equally and would never be so unfair as to "offer" salvation to one person and not another (which is based on yet another wrong premise, that it is up to us to decide anyway).

As for me, I give up. I'm taking a break from trying to yank people out of their fantasy worlds. See y'all later.

 

[Marcia]

I always heard that "hate" here does not mean it the way we use it today. Rom. 9.13 quotes Mal. 1.2,3 and the NET Bible has this footnote on it:

tn Heb "and I loved Jacob, but Esau I hated." The context indicates this is technical covenant vocabulary in which "love" and "hate" are synonymous with "choose" and "reject" respectively (see Deut 7:8; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 9:15; 11:1).

 

[Helen]

So it is a fairy tale world to believe the Bible means what it says, and that 'all' means 'all' and 'none' means 'none'.

I know that believing in the Christ means a life trust. I have written that over and over again on BB threads, some of which you have been on. Nevertheless, it is ours to place that belief, that trust, in Christ. It is not programmed into us, or Paul or Peter would never have had to tell anyone to believe in order to be saved.

In the Silver Chair, one of the Narnia books, Prince Rilian, Jill, Eustace and Puddleglum are trapped in an underground kingdom and the witch who controls it is trying to convince them there is no sun, no moon, no sky, no overworld -- that it is all a nice fairy tale they have manufactured in their imaginations.

They almost fall for it. But good old Puddleglum tells her that maybe she is right, but if she is, then he vastly prefers the made-up world to her 'real one.'

And it turns out there is an overworld, there is a sun, there is a sky, there is a moon. But her insistence that there was none almost got to them.

And that is how I feel sometimes when trying to discuss Bible with Calvinists -- like Puddleglum.

In your Calvinist world, maybe 'all' doesn't really mean 'all.' Maybe 'whosoever' really doesn't mean 'whosoever.' Maybe 'Come to me, ALL ye that labor and are heavy-laden' doesn't mean the invitation is universal. Maybe the command to seek the Lord doesn't really mean that. Maybe in the Calvinist world we really can't choose this day whom we will serve, and maybe the Lord means something different than what it seems when the invitation is given to the unsaved, "Come, let us reason together."

In the Calvinist world, maybe justice isn't really justice and 'fair' has no real meaning, despite Proverbs 1.

If that is true, then I prefer the character and the 'fairy tale' of the God I know in my heart to the Calvinist 'reality.'

 

[Rippon]

When men , ... pervert the obvious meaning of the word of God , in order to maintain their preconceived systems , it manifests deplorable dissaffection to the truth of God , and most culpabe inattention to His plainest declarations .

... they prove they misapprehend the whole drift of the Apostle's argument... Does the idea of loving less consist with the idea held forth in the expression vessels of wrath ?

We may therefore safely conclude that the Apostle does not so much speak of the posterity , as of the persons of Jacob and Esau ; and that he knew the prophecies he quotes in support of his argument not to refer alone to that posterity ; and consequently that it is certain he does speak of the eternal state of Jacob and Esau .

 

[Helen]

When men , ... pervert the obvious meaning of the word of God , in order to maintain their preconceived systems , it manifests deplorable dissaffection to the truth of God , and most culpabe inattention to His plainest declarations .

That is EXACTLY what Calvinism does.

As far as hating Esau is concerned, I would rather stick to the Bible's explanation in Obadiah than the explanation of any commentator.

 

[Rippon]

...Paul ... refers not to the external condition of the Jews , ... but to their spiritual state ... the whole tenor of his discourse makes it obvious that he is treating of their spiritual and eternal condition , this is conclusively evident from what he says in the 22d and 23rd verses ... where he speaks , on the one hand , of the vessels of wrath , fitted to destruction , and , on the other , of the vessels of mercy , prepared unto glory . These two verses , were there no other proof , evince beyond all doubt what is his object . His lamentation for his countrymen was not called forth on account of the loss of their external privileges ... it is evident that by the wrath and destruction of which the others were vessels , he means something very different from temporal calamities ... What trifling , then , what wresting of this important portion of the word of God , what turning of it entirely away from its true meaning , to represent this chapter , as so many do , as treating of the outward state of the Jews , or to deny , with others , that the spiritual and everlasting condition of Jacob and Esau are here referred to !... It is better to submit to the word of God on this and every other subject , taking it in its obvious import , than to to be deterred from doing so on account of consequences from the admission of which we may shrink back .

 

[Helen]

I still prefer Bible to commentaries. And it doesn't matter how many times you repeat them! The Bible is still inspired Scripture and explains Esau in Obadiah. But if you cannot understand Bible without your commentaries, that is your choice. I think it is sad, but God gave you that freedom to make your own choices.

 

[Rippon]

But the truth is , that all opposition to the plain and obvious meaning of this passage proceeds from ignorance of , or inattention to , the state of death and ruin in which all men by nature lie , and from which no man can be recovered by any outward means alone , however powerful in themselves . This cannot be effected by anything short of the unmerited and invincibly efficacious grace of God , operating in the heart of those on whom He will have mercy according to His sovereign good pleasure .

 

[Helen]

Good Calvinist statement. The truth is that the Bible explains about Esau. The Bible also tells us to seek God. The Bible also tells us to choose this day whom we will serve. The Bible explains it all. Very clearly, too.

 

[dntccc]

My comments are in brackets.

Matthew 26:31
Then Jesus said to them [followers of Jesus - disciples], "You will all fall away because of Me this night, for it is written, ' I WILL STRIKE DOWN THE SHEPHERD, AND THE SHEEP OF THE FLOCK SHALL BE SCATTERED.'

Matthew 24:10
10"At that time many will fall away - [implies this is refering to believers since one cannot fall from a position if he was never in that position in the first place] - and will betray one another and hate one another.

Luke 8:11-15
11"Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God.
12"Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved.
13"Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. - [saying they "believe" implies that these are people who do become believers (Christians) but it does not last since it says they "fall away"] -
14"The seed which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity.
15"But the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast - [this verse is obviously talking about those that become Christians - why would this say that they "hold it ('the word') fast" if it would be impossible for them not to do this? - if they are eternally secure no matter what, then why even say anything about them "holding it fast"?] - and bear fruit with perseverance.

1 Timothy 4:1
But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, - [addressing believers (Christians) since these people were obviously in the "faith" as they could not have fell from it otherwise] - paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,

Hebrews 3:12
Take care, brethren - [again, refering to believers], - that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. - [why warn these people of the possibility of them getting an evil, unbelieving heart and of falling away if it would be impossible for them to do so?]

Hebrews 6:4-6
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away - [addressing believers and says that they can fall away], - it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

2 Peter 3:17
You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, - [context implies that believers are being addressed - they cannot fall from their own steadfastness unless they are in a position to fall from steadfastness in the first place]

Galatians 5:18-22
18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law.
19Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality,
20idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions,
21envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. - [why is it assumed that a person that once professed faith in Jesus as Saviour is exempt from this warning?]


1 Corinthians 6:8-10
8On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. - [again, why is it assumed that if one that once professed faith in Jesus Christ, fell into these types of sins, he would still inherit the kingdom of God?]

Revelation 21:7-9
7"He who overcomes will inherit these things - [seems to be implying that one that is a believer could possibly not overcome] -, and I will be his God and he will be My son.
8"But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death."

Hebrews 3
1Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, - [referencing believers] - consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
2He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house.
3For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house.
4For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.
5Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;
6but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house--whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
7Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says,
"TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
8DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME,
AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,
9WHERE YOUR FATHERS TRIED Me BY TESTING Me,
AND SAW MY WORKS FOR FORTY YEARS.
10"THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION,
AND SAID, 'THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART,
AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS';
11AS I SWORE IN MY WRATH,
'THEY SHALL NOT ENTER MY REST.'"
12Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. - [this verse is addressing brethen (believers) and says that falling away is a possibility]
13But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end, - [the word, "if" , means that is possible that a believer could not hold fast in which case, as this says, the person will no longer be a partaker of Christ] - 15while it is said,
"TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief. - [this is comparing a Christain's walk with Jesus to the Jew's walk with God in the wilderness - because of their unbelief they were denied access to His rest - it also equates their disobedience to their unbelief - this seems then to be implying that if a believer is disobedient and has unbelief (or that disobedience would be a sign that the person would be in unbelief), he will not be able to enter into God's rest which seems like a reference to eternity with God]

I have no doubt that some that believe in OSAS will probably find a way to try to explain these verses in the context of OSAS. However, the people that believe in conditional security would probably do the same with verses presented by those that believe in OSAS to support that doctrine. I think that there are verses that could be used to support either doctrine. However, I believe that the doctrine that seems to flow more easily from the Bible is that of conditional security. In other words, I think one has to try harder to make verses "fit" the doctrine of OSAS than one does for the belief of conditional security.

 

[dntccc]

I thought that I would offer a word of encouragement to those that take the position that the Bible does teach that one must maintain, hold fast, etc. his faith in Christ to be saved and stay saved. I also believe this, but I did not always believe this way. I was brought up a Baptist and, as you might guess, was taught OSAS. I went to Christian schools from 1 – 9 grades, and, although these schools were not necessarily Baptist, they still taught, as far as I remember, OSAS as well. I accepted what the preacher and teachers told me about OSAS. This is what my immediate family believed as well.

Not too long ago, I began reading other viewpoints, namely that it was possible for a Christian to forfeit his salvation. Rather than being closed-minded about this, I read those viewpoints with the Scriptures used to back them up. I also read the supports used for OSAS. I decided that I would do my best to not let my reading of this be filtered through my preconceived viewpoint of OSAS and I would let the Bible speak for itself. What I found was that I thought there was more support for the belief that a believer could in fact fall from the faith and become lost again. The idea seemed to flow more plainly from the Scriptures than the belief of OSAS. Now my wife and I are convinced that the Bible does in fact teach that one must maintain his faith in Christ to stay saved. Do I believe one must live a life of perfection to stay saved? No, I do not believe that. Do I still have questions about this? Sure I do. Regardless of the questions I have, I am sure that one must maintain, hold fast, etc. his faith in Christ or else he will fall away (become lost). The Bible also seems to teach that obedience to Christ is also a factor in staying in Christ. Did not Christ say that those that love Him are those that obey His commandments? Is not being a Christian the same as being a follower of Christ? Would not following Christ mean that one must obey the commandments of Christ? Is it possible for a Christian to always follow Christ's commands perfectly? I do not think so. However, Christ knows everyone's heart; therefore he knows those that are striving and wanting to follow Him. I think that as long as we have faith in Christ and are stiving to walk in that faith, that Christ's blood will cover where we do fail Him.

As a side note, one thing I notice about some of the arguments used by those that believe in OSAS are sometimes along the lines of trying to compare a natural, physical situation with a spiritual one. For example, the argument that when we become a child a of God, just because we sin or stray does not mean that we will no longer be a child of God. After all, they say, if I stray or disobey my earthly father, am I not still his son? The problem with this is two-fold. First of all, this is trying to compare a earthly relationship with our spiritual relationship with God which does not necessarily have to be the same. Secondly, if this argument put forth were true, then we would all be in trouble. We are all children of the devil before we get saved, and, therefore, if it this argument put forth were true, then we could not become children of God.

Also, I see many statements made by those that believe in OSAS where they are just saying the doctrinal beliefs of OSAS without giving any verses to back them up. I used to do this as well when I believed in OSAS. By this I do not mean that no one that believes in OSAS ever gives any verses to try to support the doctrine of OSAS, for I have seen many give verses on this forum. It is just that I have also seen what I just cited as well.

Again, to those that are putting forth your arguments that the Bible does teach a conditional security, do not think that all your efforts are in vain. There are those that do change their minds about OSAS.

Here is a link to an article written by a pastor's wife. It tells of how this pastor went from believing in OSAS to believing in a conditional security and what he encountered at his church when he revealed his new beliefs:
http://www.behindthebadge.net/osas/osas59.html

 

[Me4Him]

The law requires a death for every sins not paid for by Jesus,

and since Jesus isn't dying again, who is going to die for those sins Jesus's death didn't cover???

Forgiveness, repenting, won't pay the wages of sin, death.

Who stops sinning after they're saved, no one, who pays for those sins, Flesh, it dies.

Jesus sealed the soul against sin in dying for "ALL SINS", his salvation is eternal so he's not dying for anymore sins, and neither is anyone he's saved.

 

[Rippon]

BUMP . There is another thread called " Does God Love All ?" . I think that this thread dovetails in with it ( aside from some irrelevant posts here and there ) . Take a look at my quotes of Robert Haldane in posts 1,4,11,13 and 15 .