Does God love everyone?

[Luke2427]

I've known John Piper personally since about 1994. I wouldn't call him a Calvinist by any stretch. I would call him more and more confused. Jesus is the object of the elects faith. When I experience sin and unbelief He draws me to Him again and I flee to Him once more. My hope is totally in Him and His faithfulness.

Piper is one of the preeminent Calvinsts of our day.

He just has a very emotional personality. He is a bit of a gusher. And people like that often struggle with assurance in everything- their faith just being one of the things they sometimes lack assurance in.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I was reading a blog where the woman was saying that God hates gays and they will never be saved.

Then on a bulletin board, I hear a lot of the unsaved saying that God is love and He loves everybody.

So does God love everyone? I know He hates sin but what about the sinners?

Well, there were former "gays" in the Corinthian church, both passive and aggressive "partners" if we take into consideration Paul's mentioning of being effeminate in later chapters, and I should think maybe with the other churches, too, since sodomy was an accepted lifestyle then as now.

As for the second question, I seem to recall something in the Bible that says "God is angry with the wicked everyday", not just their wickedness.

 

[Rippon]

I never said that I haven't read them. Some of my favorites.
J Vernon McGee, John F.Walvoord. James White, Aurthur Pink, A.W.Tozer, Josh Mcdowell, John Knotts, Salem Kirban, D.R Mc Connel,JR Church, Billy Sunday,Barlag Anderson, John Zachary, John Calvin, Bridges, Ankerberg, Weldon, John Mac Authur. Far to many to name them all. I've studdied them what they had to say and checked it all to see if it lined up with scripture. I also studdied how they said it and why they said it.
Note some of the above named men are Calvinist.

The above post was made by MB on Nov.9th 2008. He has recently charged me with lying regarding his mention of "John Knotts." And I hereby am setting the record straight. Now let's see if MB is able to apologize to me for his false accusation.

 

[Rippon]

I am not familiar with some on your list.But I did get a kick out of your mention of John "Knotts".Maybe you were thinking of that great theologian -- Don Knotts? You meant John Knox I'm sure.What works of his do you appreciate?

If you read the works of White and Pink (not the colors!) you will be out ahead of the pack.

And the above was a snip of my follow-up response to MB.

 

[Rippon]

I had asked you which work of Knox's have you appreciated the most.And you reply:"Commentaries".John Knox didn't write any commentaries.Perhaps you haven't really read any material by the pen of Mr.Knox.

You found that his 'commentaries' are "very helpful in disproving Calvinism."You do realize that John Knox was an ardent Calvinist,don't you?I guess not.

Here is what Knox said about Geneva:"is the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the Apostles."Geneva was where Knox studied and preached for several years.He looked up to John Calvin and learned (as is apparent from the quote) a lot from him.

In 1559 John Knox wrote his longest work :"On Predestination".It was a polemic against an Anabaptist.Here's a quote:"God willeth all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"speaketh not of every man,and of every particular person,but of all men in general,that is to say,of men of all estates,all conditions,all realms,and all ages.

This was a further reply to a post by MB.

 

[agedman]

Who remembers what they wrote back in 2008?

 

[Internet Theologian]

The above post was made by MB on Nov.9th 2008. He has recently charged me with lying regarding his mention of "John Knotts." And I hereby am setting the record straight. Now let's see if MB is able to apologize to me for his false accusation.

There it is, but when you call one on false accusations another will rush in to defend them. Such behavior is the behavior of hypocrites. BTW I've received the same in a recent thread from said person. It hasn't changed in nearly 8 years.

As to the OP, the Scriptures are clear in their answer. Unfaithfulness in declaring the Word has caused many to balk at the Word and what it really says - they don't want to hear it, they enjoy remaining oblivious to all the truths of Scripture. All that are otherwise be careful to thank God for your stance, it is all to His glory.

 

[Internet Theologian]

There it is, but when you call one on false accusations another will rush in to defend them. Such behavior is the behavior of hypocrites. BTW I've received the same in a recent thread from said person. It hasn't changed in nearly 8 years.

As to the OP, the Scriptures are clear in their answer. Unfaithfulness in declaring the Word has caused many to balk at the Word and what it really says - they don't want to hear it, they enjoy remaining oblivious to all the truths of Scripture. All that are otherwise be careful to thank God for your stance, it is all to His glory.

Noted that one believes the above is 'old'. That is the problem in a nutshell. That and rushing in to defend false accusers will be called out when witnessed.

 

[MB]

The above post was made by MB on Nov.9th 2008. He has recently charged me with lying regarding his mention of "John Knotts." And I hereby am setting the record straight. Now let's see if MB is able to apologize to me for his false accusation.

The other day you accused me of reading or saying I read a commentary by John Knotts. Because you misspelled his name as I did in 2008. I didn't recognize who you were talking about. Although you claimed I said it was written by John Knotts. I must have misspelled his name in 2008. I was naming favorites. The actual name of who wrote the books in question is William Ramsay the name of the books is The Layman's Guide to the New testament. The books are published by the John Knox Press. I think your making a mountain out of a mole hill in your effort of ridicule. When all you have accomplished is you just proved I'm not perfect. I freely admit that. I make mistakes as do we all.

Should I ridicule you now in retaliation? I don't have to you do that. You do it well enough to your self every time you get so emotional over discussing scripture
MB

 

[Rippon]

The other day you accused me of reading or saying I read a commentary by John Knotts.

Yes, because you claimed that you had read commentaries by "John Knotts" disproving Calvinism.

Because you misspelled his name as I did in 2008. I didn't recognize who you were talking about.

Of course you recognized it. I was having fun with you. You had called him John Knotts and it was funny.

Although you claimed I said it was written by John Knotts.

My "claim" was true, as I have demonstrated.

I must have misspelled his name in 2008.

Duh, ya' think so?

I was naming favorites. The actual name of who wrote the books in question is William Ramsay the name of the books is The Layman's Guide to the New testament. The books are published by the John Knox Press.

So now you have admitted that you did not read any commentaries by Knox at all. You read some material from a publisher by the name of John Knox Press. You can't even tell the difference.

I think your [sic]making a mountain out of a mole hill [sic]in your effort of ridicule.

All I wanted was for you to withdrawl you accusation of liar, because you actually did what I said you did. You could have simply said you were "sorry" instead of beating around the bush as you have.

 

[Rippon]

I had said that I had given you quite a number of Scriptural citations -- but you came along and said that I only quote dead men.

You said in post #165"Try trusting in God instead of old dead men."

The above was a rebuke to me because of a passing reference to Charles Spurgeon.

When I said that I was pointing out your dishonesty -- it was not meant as an insult -- I was using a descriptive term.

How dare you say that I merely trust "in old dead men" -- while you -- the self-aggrandizing one trust in God.I could have said a lot more than the fact that you were dishonest.

______________________________________________________
A different subject follows.

You have said a lot of things which are patently wrong.I'll itemize just a few of your gems and let them stand without comment (except for brackets to clarify).

One thing I know of Esau is that God must have loved him.

God loved and hated Esau.

Everyone has been chosen for salvation.

Everyman has a chance to be saved.

God has mercy on the vessels of wrath [Ro.9:22] because they became vessels of mercy in the same chapter.

Election is general,not particular.

I'd place it [NIV]on the same level as the NWT.

[When I quoted the TNIV] :You can place your trust where you want to,but then it's your soul.

I found J Vernon McGee to be the most respectable of all Calvinist writers.

I found them [John Knox's commentaries] helpful in disproving Calvinism.

___________________________________________________________

[The next couple of items are paraphrased.Rip]

I believe in private interpretation.

One doesn't know if one is elect.

God has mercy on the whole world.

We don't know if Esau believed in God or not.

MB, do you still hold to the things I itemized above?

 

[Rippon]

Heb 12:6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son he receiveth. Verse 8 If ye be without chastisement, wherefore all are partakers, then are ye bastards and not son's. No love, No chastisement, simple. St. John 11-3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick. What a strange message to be sent to Christ if he loved the whole world. Why in verse five would it say, Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister,and Lazarus if it was not because they were the elect ? St. John 13-1 Now before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew his hour was come that he should depart out of the world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. It doesn't say, having loved the world, he loved them unto the end. You people that say that God loves everyone the same, go tell your wife how much you love her and you would die for her, now tell her also that you love every woman in the world with the same love you lover her with and see how well that goes over. What ! you can't do this, you have too, to be Christ like. :love2:

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. I would like people who think that God loves everyone to respond to what salzer mtn wrote.

 

[DHK]

I agree wholeheartedly with the above. I would like people who think that God loves everyone to respond to what salzer mtn wrote.

Why are you bringing up old threads?
In October of 2008, Dr. Bob posted in the third post of this thread:

Obviously God places a special saving love on His elected individuals. We are "in the beloved" from eternity past based on His sovereign grace alone (although I'm pretty lovable myself :saint: )

He has a generic love on all His creation, allowing rain to fall on the just and unjust alike. And His special saving love is not JUST for Jews, but also for the world (Gentiles) too. Praise His redeeming love.

http://www.baptistboard.com/threads/does-god-love-everyone.49084/#post-1234337

 

[InTheLight]

All I wanted was for you to withdrawl [sic] you [sic] accusation of liar, because you actually did what I said you did. You could have simply said you were "sorry" instead of beating around the bush as you have.

Hey, pointing out people's typos is fun!



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Rippon]

Hey, pointing out people's typos is fun!

Touche. You got me. And it was fun. I had a good laugh.

 

[Rippon]

Does God love those He does not chastise?
Does God love those who do not fear Him?
Does God love those to whom He will say on the Final Day --I never knew you?
Does God love those in eternal perdition?

 

[agedman]

Does God love those He does not chastise?
Does God love those who do not fear Him?
Does God love those to whom He will say on the Final Day --I never knew you?
Does God love those in eternal perdition?

Does God require from the believer what He does not of Himself?

"love your enemies."

 

[Rippon]

Does God require from the believer what He does not of Himself?

"love your enemies."

Answer my four questions before you introduce your own.

 

[MB]

Man, when you go off the deep end, you really go. You're gonna get lonely on that little island you're living on.

Oh you are mistaken I'm never alone, not ever. I praise God that I'm not caught in the mire of Calvinism believing in old dead men in stead of the truth of scripture.
MB

 

[agedman]

Answer my four questions before you introduce your own.

I thought that by asking you a question, the answer to yours would be self evident.

But to entertain your questions:

1. Does God love those He does not chastise? What makes you think that God does not "chastise?" Seems that the Scriptures show that God brings rebuke to all humankind as the "wages" demand payment. Did He not cast out those in the temple?
   
2. Does God love those who do not fear Him? What makes you think that God does not? Was there a time you did not fear Him? Did He love you in spite of that lack of fear?
3. Does God love those to whom He will say on the Final Day --I never knew you? That is an interesting question. Can one love those that one does not know? If not, why support missionaries? Is love constrained by who someone knows? A child still in the womb is loved, but do the parents actually "know" the child - experiential speaking?
   
4. Does God love those in eternal perdition? He provided a place for them didn't he? He reminds them continually of their condition and what the rejection they presented to God is now condemned them - just as the rich man's statement of his condition. This may not seem like love because human kind tend to consider love only with positive outcomes and pie in the sky terms.

Now, answer my question as you said you would.
Does God require from the believer what He does not of Himself? "love your enemies."