Why would God say:  "I Have Hated Esau..."?

Anything else need rewriting while we are at it Dave? Of course you have no authority to teach a lie by rewriting the scriptures to fit your belief. A belief that needs to do such things is worse than usless. There are serious consequences for those who practise this deception. Was Rachael the mother of Edom?

Rom 9:13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Scripture cannot be broken.

john. </font>[/QUOTE]Hi John

Please take it easy on me. Please note that I am not trying to teach anything nor am I interested in rewriting scripture. Please, please, please realize that I indeed have no authority nor did I dare claim that I had one ounce of authority on the subject regarding what is right or wrong. I am just trying to participate in a very interesting discussion.

Please don't imply that I am a deciever or that I am trying to decieve anyone.

All I said is that it makes sense to me. I actually feel a little hurt.

You too Scott.

Best regards,

Dave

 

Sorry Dave. This is one of those debates where the feeding frenzy isn't safe for the cubs.

The interpretive translation you agreed with has a history of conflict here so the knee jerk reaction was that you were coming down on the other side.

Again, I apologize.

 

It is the reason God hated Esau: it was his coice to sell his birthright in exchange to satisfy his flesh, not that God chose Esau to hate prior.

The same application is to Cain's offering the works of his hands that God "hated".

Those things which are under the curse are not pleasing to God, but only a necessity for human life physically.

To rightly divide the Word of Truth, one MUST remember God is "a" Spirit: only spiritual things can please God and those are the things He asks for, not what we want to give Him as to "impress" Him.

 

Sal, I am going to quote the passage with context in response because it is really all that is necessary to refute what you posted above.

This also directly answers Me4Him's contention that God is unjust if He doesn't offer the same opportunity for salvation to everyone.

 

Hello Dave.

I agree with you and Scott I apologise. I was too harsh. Not wrong though. Thank you for your correction. Heed ours.

It isn't a personal attack as a deceiver does not necessarily have to know he deceives but an attack against the scripture is there.
Is 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

The passage is clearly best rendered: "Israel I loved, Edom I loved less."

That does not speak according to His word and is therefore not true.
That might have been a better way of putting it. We all speak a lie when we misquote scripture.

Chin up man. Stiff upper lip and all that. I think the callouses will take awhile to soften with me be patient, I was on the C/A forum for years I've forgotten polite.

john.

 

Sal, I am going to quote the passage with context in response because it is really all that is necessary to refute what you posted above.

This also directly answers Me4Him's contention that God is unjust if He doesn't offer the same opportunity for salvation to everyone. </font>[/QUOTE]Only problem you have with that is you're not taking the aspect of God's omniscience into account and the choice made by Esau at that point in time. Maybe it's because you've watched too many movies and think life is a movie?

God knew in eternity past that Esau would choose to satisfy his weak flesh rather than wait on God to accomplish his birthright from Isaac, but that didn't alter the fact that Esau could have chosen differently.

If, as you believe, all life is an open book and everything will happen just as it was predestinated, then God is guilty of giving man the ability to reason and thereby know his dilemma presenting only mental abuse to anyone who ends up in hell having no alternative in choice to repent, thus this ideal of yours would also do away with repentence and place all the sin as God's ultimate fault.

ERROR!!! ERROR!!!

 

Hello Salamander.

I should think that mental abuse would be the last of one's worry's in Hell Salamander. The rich man did not seem to think his problem was a mental one.

I think those in Hell will see Him as Sovereign and hate Him all the more for it. Total depravity in it's full sense.

This, I think, is where I part company with Scott and and I know every other Calvinist I've had the pleasure to know. I'm sure both us would question 'fault' as being the right word to use when applied to an act of God but I believe He is the Author of sin. And I can prove it from scripture.

One must be born again to repent. Repentance is a righteous act and we are not capable of one of those unless we are born again. Unless a man is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God and will have no reason to repent.

Opinion opinion scripture scripture please.

john.

 

A feeding frenzy describes the habits of sharks. It also implies that there may be something wrong amidst all the wonderful knowledge that is being shared. So putting knowledge aside for a moment, I would like to address what I consider is a more important issue to me personally. That is the issue of character or the quality of a man or woman that is a Christian who is trying to save others.

I consider you a man of character for your sincere apology. Your explanation also shows that you have understanding and compassion. It is only a man of character or reputation and understanding that I will listen to. I can listen to you more.

Additionally, aren’t you really trying to reach the cubs with your knowledge? What good is it to fight with the pack, when there might be hungry cubs around? I hope that you find pleasure in having cubs around the pack. The things you say and do now will affect sensitive and eager young minds of the cubs. Cubs need kindness, gentleness and unconditional acceptance. It is in this healthy family setting that cubs can gain the knowledge they need to succeed in their lives. I am here on this web site looking for men and women of character first, then knowledge. I am lonely and I lack wisdom on many spiritual issues. I am a cub and I am reachable.

I agree with you and Scott I apologise. I was too harsh. Not wrong though. Thank you for your correction. Heed ours. </font>[/QUOTE]Let me speak.

John, Your apology comes with mixed signals. You apologize yet seem to reassert your dominance over me. It matters not to me, how much knowledge you have, but how you treat me as you share such precious and hard to gain knowledge. How can I trust you, if I don't think you even like me as a person. I don't think that having abundant knowledge releases me from the commandment to love one another and to have that love for others in increasing amounts. Love to me, is kind, gentle and makes peace. Love to me, is much more important than knowledge. Love to me, is not self-seeking or demanding of it’s own way. Love to me, doesn’t (imo) hold a grudge or treat others (lost or saved) with contempt.

Chin up man. Stiff upper lip and all that. I think the callouses will take awhile to soften with me be patient, I was on the C/A forum for years I've forgotten polite. </font>[/QUOTE]Now you are being honest with me and your character is gaining credit with me. If you would consider reversing your tactics and always put being polite first, then try to make your knowledge easier to entreat, you might reach more cubs, as Scott so aptly described me.

Imho, during a debate or discussion with a Christian, I should not have to put my chin up or keep a stiff upper lip or feel the need to protect myself. I should not anticipate receiving facial bruises or a busted lip as I engage a believer in complex topics. That is not gentle, kind, selfless, peaceable or humble. Instead it becomes an environment of hostility and men of faith should not produce an environment of hostility during their public debates. Gentleness, kindness, meekness and charity should always be present in a Christian’s conversation, if that person is a follower of the Christ. Knowledge alone in my opinion doesn’t make a man of character. A man of character is always polite, even when he is right and everyone else is wrong. I think it can even be a sacrifice. Being polite can taste bad in my mouth but it is as sweet as honey to all those who receive it. If your knowledge is great, then your responsibility and accountability is also great. If being polite, kind or gentle has to be omitted from my delivery of knowledge, then my knowledge is of no value to others. If during my debates or conversations, I have contempt for my audience, even though I may disguise my contempt, I feel that I practice evil even though I have knowledge. I say that, because I've done it before and I am ashamed of it.

To me, it is good character first, at all times and never failing, then knowledge, not the other way around. This is one reason why I think cults are so effective and powerful. They put love first, and then deliver bad knowledge then they remove love. Love first and always, and then good knowledge and love that remains is a perfect combination, in my opinion.

It is not my intent veer off topic, but I was taken aback and surprised as I began to participate in this thread. Honestly, I did not expect it.

Regards,

David

 

Anything else need rewriting while we are at it Dave? Of course you have no authority to teach a lie by rewriting the scriptures to fit your belief. A belief that needs to do such things is worse than usless. There are serious consequences for those who practise this deception. Was Rachael the mother of Edom?

Rom 9:13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Scripture cannot be broken.

john. </font>[/QUOTE]Lu 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Ya know, according to your/Scott, "interpretation", If I want to be a "Christian" I must "HATE", my "WHOLE FAMILY".

As you said, the scriptures can't be broken, so evidently, your theory must have "Broke".

 

Sal, I am going to quote the passage with context in response because it is really all that is necessary to refute what you posted above.

This also directly answers Me4Him's contention that God is unjust if He doesn't offer the same opportunity for salvation to everyone. </font>[/QUOTE]Only problem you have with that is you're not taking the aspect of God's omniscience into account and the choice made by Esau at that point in time. Maybe it's because you've watched too many movies and think life is a movie?</font>[/QUOTE] Notably Sal, all I did is cite scripture, in context, to you. It says what it says... which is almost the opposite of what you said in the post I responded to.

Your response doesn't change the fact that God said before they did anything He chose Jacob and hated Esau. It wasn't based on doing good or evil... for certainly Jacob was an egregious liar and cheat.

Never said it. Don't believe it. Please don't behave like the typical anti-calvinist by putting words in my mouth and mischaracterizing my position.

BTW, unless you are an open theist, you can't escape your accusation any better than I.

 

... And STILL Me4Him hasn't answered my simple question. That says volumes about your position.

 

I should think that mental abuse would be the last of one's worry's in Hell Salamander. The rich man did not seem to think his problem was a mental one.

I think those in Hell will see Him as Sovereign and hate Him all the more for it. Total depravity in it's full sense.

This, I think, is where I part company with Scott and and I know every other Calvinist I've had the pleasure to know. I'm sure both us would question 'fault' as being the right word to use when applied to an act of God but I believe He is the Author of sin. And I can prove it from scripture.

One must be born again to repent. Repentance is a righteous act and we are not capable of one of those unless we are born again. Unless a man is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God and will have no reason to repent.

Opinion opinion scripture scripture please.

john. </font>[/QUOTE]Your "opinion" isn't worth "Squat" with God, only his "opinion" is correct, and after reading some of the things you've posted, it's clear the "Holy Ghost" isn't teaching you.

It isn't whether I or anyone agrees/disagree with you, but whether you can stand in front of Jesus and have him agree that all you've said/taught was "By the Spirit",

I wouldn't make any "brags" I couldn't "back up", in front of Jesus, because you'll have to, along with everyone else, no one escapes this Judgment.

Mt 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

Too many people today are under the impression, "Who is going to prove me wrong", and think they can "get away" with preaching/teaching most anything they chose, they can't,

those listening to the Spirit quickly recognize "folly", and those who aren't follow after them and both fall into the pit.

Of all the condemning sins today, I'd say "False Doctrines" claims as many souls as "Unbelief",

Yes, you can attend church/tithes/read bible/teach/preach/believe a lie and still go to hell.

Mt 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Nu 32:23 and be sure your sin will find you out.

I'd suggest a "double check" with the "ONE" to whom you have to give an account, to "be sure" you're "telling" it "RIGHT".

 

There are some things so "Spiritually deep", the "Simple minded" (Spiritually) can't comprehended them.

1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

I will give you a "Clue", Jesus offer to take Jerusalem "under his wings", and they "would not",

"TWO ROUTES" were offer to the JEWS, "under his wings/not under his wings, THEIR CHOICE

"SUPPOSE", they had accepted Jesus's offer, would history/the world be "Different" today???

Is the present "History/World" the results of "God's will", (he offered, they refused) or of "MAN'S WILL"??

And what about the "FUTURE", The Tribulation period, is it "Set in stone", or would it be eliminated if everyone accepted Jesus as Savior??

God's "Judgment" only come "AFTER SIN", not before, and whatever "Judgment" for sin that comes on the world/people,

creates it "History/Present/Future".

The Plight of the Jews today is the results of "THEIR CHOICE", God offered, they refused.

 

Hello Dave.

Not mixed signals more like different messages. While I readily apologise for the way I spoke I do not apologise for the truth spoken.

I want to discuss the bible with people that want to discuss the bible. The reasoning that brought me to discussion forums in the first place was the idea that I would be able to talk to others and learn, Calvinism in particular.
What I found was very surprising to me. I found people who did not believe the scriptures and who were following some sort of Sweet Jesus who loved everyone and pleaded with man for him to save himself.
Instead of finding myself being a pupil in a safe enviroment I found that I was on the front line of a raging battle where being a street kid came in handy. It made me hard as nails. Discussion forums are no playgrounds and a more robust chin is essential, but hopefully not from me now you have made yourself clear.

Easy peasy check the scriptures. Trust Christ not man. Even false prophets are telling the truth sometimes. Likes and don't likes does not interfer with the flow of information though politeness does add needed grease. I live at peace with all men wherever possible it makes for an easier life.

It gives one the moral highground as well.

Shall we continue? If so did you know Malachi 3:1-5 does not sound like loved less.

john.

 

Like John mentioned, he and I disagree on points.

However, like he said, his case comes from the Bible. So whether he, I, or anyone else is discerning it exactly right... the chances of our having been taught by the Holy Spirit are much greater than someone who espouses what you do in spite of scripture. You choose the scriptures that agree with your inflated views of man and his sovereign will but dismiss those that show God's sovereignty and election. You claim to believe in grace but deny the very definition of it in your arguments.

The Holy Spirit declared that we are saved "by" grace "through" faith... and in spite of your desire to flip that order... that's what the Holy Spirit actually said when He was inspiring the inerrant Word. I hope you will forgive me for not respecting whatever "leading" you are feeling over what the Bible actually says in context.

That's a greater concern for you than John. John at least tries to account for all of scripture. You just dismiss the parts or change the meaning of things that you can't answer under your system.

That's probably a big part of why you can't give me a straight answer to the straight question I asked you.

Then why are you? You are saying that John isn't Spirit led but it is you that refuse to deal with all of what the Spirit said through the inspired writers and instead come up with a kind of indirect claim for being inspired yourself on how to interpret things into meaning something they don't say... or in some cases are the opposite of what was said.

If you are hearing a spirit that tells you that scripture doesn't really mean what it says... then that spirit is not the Holy Spirit.

Oh... so now this spirit has told you that we are lost, right?

BTW, since when can "False Doctrines" claim a soul? You said that only unbelief could send someone to hell.

So we are believing a lie for believing what scripture actually says instead of what you say it says- guided of course by your inflated view of man, his goodness, and his free will.

I'd suggest you deal with that beam before lecturing us about motes.

 

Hello Me4Him.

I did not give an opinion I gave scripture and I expect you to do the same when you print your opinions. Your words are as valuable as mine, worthless unless they accord with the scriptures.

only his "opinion" is correct Is that so? Why then do you not use His words in your defence? Is He in Trinity or not?

Are you saying I believe I'm without error? I stand before God continually my conscience is clear. Does the same go for you?

I have no judgement to come Christ died for my sins. What charge can be brought against me?
What 'brags' are you speaking about? Show me where I bragged but if I did I brag I would only brag about my Christ who died for my sins. I do not consider any man better than any other but you do. Your faith saved you but my Saviour saved me.

Opinion: no one escapes this Judgment
Scripture: Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus... Rom 8:1. Thanks for the warning but it isn't necessary as it is false. Would you like to explain my error regarding my use of Romans 8:1?

Mt 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. That would be covered by Christ dying for my sins. Did He not for yours? If He did then what is He going to judge? We are holy and blameless in His sight, Eph 1:4. Are you not holy and blameless in His sight? Yes or no? Use scripture. If not why not? If not can you stand before Him without fear and dread of what is to come to those who are not as holy as me and as blameless as me?

You can read the hearts and minds of people? Cool man. and think they can

No sin condemns but Adam's.

Thank you.

Thanks for all the advise. By the way you have not answered whether you believe in the Trinity yet. I take a refusal to admit to God as a denial of Him.

john.

 

Ok Me4Him what are you saying? The will of God thwarted? God says I wanted but you wouldn't? Looks good for you don't it? Some God.

MT 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Needs interpretation. Who exactly are or what exactly is Jerusalem, Jerusalem. So good He named it twice.

I think that is the only place for wiggle.

john.

 

There are some things so "Spiritually deep", the "Simple minded" (Spiritually) can't comprehended them.</font>[/QUOTE] Your attitude is becoming more and more offensive... all because you can't present your case effectively.

I guess now because you can't counter what we argue or answer basic, reasonable questions while maintaining both scripture and your "belief system" we are just too simply minded to get it. IOW's, it couldn't be because your vain view of man's goodness is false. It couldn't be because you pick and choose what scriptures to use so can't answer those you would rather ignore. No... it must be because we aren't spiritual enough or discerning enough.

Typical of anti-calvinist. Not right. Not honest. But typical of every one that gets backed into a corner by the weakness of their position in answering fundamental "deep" questions in a way that is consistent with the Spirit (ie. the inspired Word).

Don't give me clues... I know where your clues would logically end. But then, if I said "you said..." you would retort with "I never said that..."

If you don't believe that God's perfect will is going to be accomplished because He said so... then just admit it. It is tantamount to denying His biblical attributes but you would at least be honest.

Most definitely... that would mean that God's foreknowledge had failed and that His perfect will had not been accomplished.

God through the prophets said that the Messiah would make a way of salvation for the Gentiles. It was necessary for the Jews to reject Christ in order for this plan to be completed... just like it was necessary for Judas to betray Christ.

God saw it. He allowed it. He sovereignly chose NOT to change it... though He very easily could have. That is what scripture tells us. However it also tells us that because of man's sin, God must take an active role in salvation.

Like dead Lazarus, He must resurrect us so that we can follow Him. All the exhortations to follow were useless to Lazarus while dead.

Both God's permissive will that allows man's sinfulness to exist in order that His holiness and justice might be manifest... and God's perfect will that His sovereignty and grace might be manifest. Man's will comes in under the "permissive" side where everything gets messed up... not on the side where everything gets fixed.

It is because we submit to the Spirits will that we do anything "good" even now.

Yes. God's plan is set in stone. And He already knows who He will save and who He will leave in their rebellion. Both groups are necessary to the fulfillment of God's perfect will that He might be glorified.

Nope. Sinners are condemned already.

You have almost followed your logic to its only reasonable end- open theism. Its heresy... but at least its consistent.

God offered knowing that they would refuse and chose in eternity past to do nothing about it... except for the elect who He also chose from eternity past.

Yes they chose. Yes they are guilty. No God did not intervene when He very easily could have. No God is not guilty.

All of this becomes much easier if you give up your unbiblically high view of man and unbiblically low view of God.... just accept and accommodate ALL of what scripture has to say on the subject.

 

John... If I happen not to be around when Me4Him actually answers one of our objections head on rather than evading and obfuscating... please PM me.

Thanks

 

Don't hold your breath Scott.

john.