COMMON-ground?

[Skandelon]

My current take on this is that God loves all people in same way as I can love all Children, but have "specific" greater love towards my own children!

I think that view would be very consistent with that of John Calvin and modern Calvinists such as MacArthur. Would you also affirm that God desires all to be saved?

 

[JesusFan]

I think that view would be very consistent with that of John Calvin and modern Calvinists such as MacArthur. Would you also affirm that God desires all to be saved?

God desires all to be saved in my position in that jesus DID die to atone for all people, that fulfills His divine Love...

problem is that in His Holiness, God cannot accpept people just the way there are, being sinners, those born into Adam and sin natures

So law decrees none get saved, none deserve it, His love allows Him to extend Grace towards those He has chosen to shopw His mercy upon...

See me next week to see if my understanding stayed same!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I am troubled by the tendency of some - often young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine - who insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe.

I encounter that view, it seems, with increasing frequency.
The argument inevitably goes like this: Psalm 7:11 tells us "God is angry with the wicked every day." It seems reasonable to assume that if God loved everyone, He would have chosen everyone unto salvation. Therefore, God does not love the non-elect. Those who hold this view often go to great lengths to argue that John 3:16 cannot really mean God loves the whole world.

Perhaps the best-known argument for this view is found the unabridged edition of an otherwise excellent book, The Sovereignty of God, by A. W. Pink. Pink wrote, "God loves whom He chooses. He does not love everybody." [1] He further argued that the word world in John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world...") "refers to the world of believers (God's elect), in contradistinction from 'the world of the ungodly.'"[2] - MacArthur

Maybe you can explain his love for Easu (Sarcasm) but I'd like to here your thoughts on that scripture.

 

[Skandelon]

Maybe you can explain his love for Easu (Sarcasm) but I'd like to here your thoughts on that scripture.

Sure, this was unpacked in THIS THREAD a while back, and I think you'll see that ArchAngel represents more of the Classical Calvinistic position of men like MacArthur, while some others represent more of the "extreme" view of men like Pink.

NOTE: When reading that OP keep in mind, "I'm not arguing that God did save Esau, we don't know. It never says anything about his being saved or not, which is really the point I'm attempting to make. Instead, the focus is on God's choice to use Jacob for noble purposes...to be the nation that ushers in the Messiah and carries God's revelation to man. One is chosen for "noble purposes" while the other for "common use" as Paul explains later. Does this certainly mean that Esau didn't have the ability to have faith in God? I argue that it doesn't because there are those in Israel who are blinded (common use) who later are provoked by envy and saved (rm 11:14).


I hope that helps, but feel free to follow up with comments or questions about that here.

 

[Benjamin]

My current take on this is that God loves all people in same way as I can love all Children, but have "specific" greater love towards my own children!

God’s Love for the world which He created is so great that He gave His Only Child to redeem the creatures He has made, for whososever will believe in His act of Love. Do you see how one can run into error in trying to compare that you have a “specific” greater love for your children to God’s Holy Love being that He sacrificed His Own? God promised His Only Begotten for the world from the very foundation of it, freely and not because a single one of His creatures deserved it…would you be willing to make that kind of sacrifice, give your most loved and only child who is perfect and without sin to show your love to the world so that they could believe (Key question – In what do we believe?)…or is God’s Love so great it is beyond making such a comparison of loving His own more as we would be inclined to do? Jesus willingly died in faith of His Father’s Love for the world…In Christ; through His faith of that great love we are saved!

God freely sacrificed His Only Child in Love; in that we get a glimpse of how great His Love is and how it is beyond such earthly comparisons. That is the light we are to preach…a message of God’s Love, there ain’t no darkness in that Love. Amen

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

God’s Love for the world which He created is so great that He gave His Only Child to redeem the creatures He has made, for whososever will believe in His act of Love. Do you see how one can run into error in trying to compare that you have a “specific” greater love for your children to God’s Holy Love being that He sacrificed His Own? God promised His Only Begotten for the world from the very foundation of it, freely and not because a single one of His creatures deserved it…would you be willing to make that kind of sacrifice, give your most loved and only child who is perfect and without sin to show your love to the world so that they could believe (Key question – In what do we believe?)…or is God’s Love so great it is beyond making such a comparison of loving His own more as we would be inclined to do? Jesus willingly died in faith of His Father’s Love for the world…In Christ; through His faith of that great love we are saved!

God freely sacrificed His Only Child in Love; in that we get a glimpse of how great His Love is and how it is beyond such earthly comparisons. That is the light we are to preach…a message of God’s Love, there ain’t no darkness in that Love. Amen

In your thinking process, did Christ truly save anyone?

 

[DHK]

When I witness to an individual (unsaved), I sometimes tell them:

There is no one in this world that God loves anymore than you.

Whether the person gets saved or not, I believe the statement is true.

"For God so loved the world..."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Sure, this was unpacked in THIS THREAD a while back, and I think you'll see that ArchAngel represents more of the Classical Calvinistic position of men like MacArthur, while some others represent more of the "extreme" view of men like Pink.

NOTE: When reading that OP keep in mind, "I'm not arguing that God did save Esau, we don't know. It never says anything about his being saved or not, which is really the point I'm attempting to make. Instead, the focus is on God's choice to use Jacob for noble purposes...to be the nation that ushers in the Messiah and carries God's revelation to man. One is chosen for "noble purposes" while the other for "common use" as Paul explains later. Does this certainly mean that Esau didn't have the ability to have faith in God? I argue that it doesn't because there are those in Israel who are blinded (common use) who later are provoked by envy and saved (rm 11:14).


I hope that helps, but feel free to follow up with comments or questions about that here.

This only proves that Calvinists have a difference of opinion. Any Calvinist could of told you that. So to answer your original OP of yesterday.....no, we dont all agree with your statement. And that doesnt make anybody a Hyper Calvinist either. Frankly Im disappointed that you would use that terminology to label the brethren.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

When I witness to an individual (unsaved), I sometimes tell them:

There is no one in this world that God loves anymore than you.

Whether the person gets saved or not, I believe the statement is true.

"For God so loved the world..."

.... to kinda butter them up so to speak, get them on your side I guess. That angle never worked on me though. do you also ask them if they died today, where would you go ...?

Why to Heaven of course you silly.....you just told me God loves me exceedingly.......:thumbsup:

 

[Skandelon]

This only proves that Calvinists have a difference of opinion.

I acknowledged that point in the OP, remember? That is why I asked for people to realize that we CAN and SHOULD have a common ground on this subject.

Any Calvinist could of told you that.

Yep, just like MacArthur and the others I quoted did. Yet, I still got much disagreement, as if they didn't really believe what I said they did.

So to answer your original OP of yesterday.....no, we dont all agree with your statement.

I already knew that, which was the point of OP. To call for consideration of the common ground with the mainstream views.

And that doesnt make anybody a Hyper Calvinist either. Frankly Im disappointed that you would use that terminology to label the brethren.

Go back and read the post where that term was introduced and my follow up comments. You will see that I quoted other reformed believers who use this label and you will see that I even question that label due to its anti-evangelistic connotation. I believe I was very fair in my approach on this point.

It was MacArthur, Phil Johson, Hendryx and others who said this view was "hyper" or tended toward that direction.

Either way, it makes the valid point that there is much biblical evidence to support the view of God's universal love and desire since even many mainstream Calvinist acknowledge it and accept it.

 

[DHK]

.... to kinda butter them up so to speak, get them on your side I guess. That angle never worked on me though. do you also ask them if they died today, where would you go ...?

Why to Heaven of course you silly.....you just told me God loves me exceedingly.......:thumbsup:

No, I told you God loves everyone equally the same. He is no respecter of persons. Whether or not the person has a religious background is irrelevant. If he is not one of the elect at this point God loves him just the same.

In other words whether or not he is elect (we don't know) God loves all people equally. Thus my statement remains true.

 

[preacher4truth]

No, I told you God loves everyone equally the same. He is no respecter of persons. Whether or not the person has a religious background is irrelevant. If he is not one of the elect at this point God loves him just the same.

In other words whether or not he is elect (we don't know) God loves all people equally. Thus my statement remains true.

Are there any passages suggesting God hates the wicked?

- Peace

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No, I told you God loves everyone equally the same. He is no respecter of persons. Whether or not the person has a religious background is irrelevant. If he is not one of the elect at this point God loves him just the same.

In other words whether or not he is elect (we don't know) God loves all people equally. Thus my statement remains true.

Then is love that does not save truly love?

 

[quantumfaith]

God’s Love for the world which He created is so great that He gave His Only Child to redeem the creatures He has made, for whososever will believe in His act of Love. Do you see how one can run into error in trying to compare that you have a “specific” greater love for your children to God’s Holy Love being that He sacrificed His Own? God promised His Only Begotten for the world from the very foundation of it, freely and not because a single one of His creatures deserved it…would you be willing to make that kind of sacrifice, give your most loved and only child who is perfect and without sin to show your love to the world so that they could believe (Key question – In what do we believe?)…or is God’s Love so great it is beyond making such a comparison of loving His own more as we would be inclined to do? Jesus willingly died in faith of His Father’s Love for the world…In Christ; through His faith of that great love we are saved!

God freely sacrificed His Only Child in Love; in that we get a glimpse of how great His Love is and how it is beyond such earthly comparisons. That is the light we are to preach…a message of God’s Love, there ain’t no darkness in that Love. Amen

Amen Brother.....shucking the corn.

 

[quantumfaith]

When I witness to an individual (unsaved), I sometimes tell them:

There is no one in this world that God loves anymore than you.

Whether the person gets saved or not, I believe the statement is true.

"For God so loved the world..."

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[JesusFan]

Then is love that does not save truly love?

We err when we pit the Love of God vrs the Holiness of God...

Cross of Christ is where both meet, and are perfectly united....

That people are not saved, whose fault is that, theirs or God?

Either God refused to give enough Love and Grace towards them, or else their will overpowered His love towards them...

Either way, tough love!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Amen Brother.....shucking the corn.

Is that like ....mucking the stalls? :laugh:

Maybe slopping the hogs ROFL

 

[DHK]

Then is love that does not save truly love?

I love all my children just the same, and always will.
If one of them goes astray should I love him any less?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

We err when we pit the Love of God vrs the Holiness of God...

Cross of Christ is where both meet, and are perfectly united....

That people are not saved, whose fault is that, theirs or God?

Either God refused to give enough Love and Grace towards them, or else their will overpowered His love towards them...

Either way, tough love!

Really? Thats your explanition....tough love!?! :laugh: Seriously :laugh:

 

[JesusFan]

Really? Thats your explanition....tough love!?! :laugh: Seriously :laugh:

Nope..,. just that IF we fall on either side of this question, we will run into "tough love" as either we will be forced to have a God who Loves, but can be denied by human willpower, or who else determines who gets saved, period and is more Allah like than Yahweh like!