Does God love the seed of the serpent? pt2

[Iconoclast]

There were several posts that needed an examination and answer from the other thread.
JonC

The problem is where you have tried to take these teachings. You have moved away from Scripture inch by inch until you have decided God either did not love us while we were sinners or that in our lost state we were the "seed of the woman".

I have always posted God loved us[the elect] while we were yet sinners. That is the teaching of Romans 5.
There was never a time when the elect were not considered as being outside of the Mediator
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

JonC

I am pushing the issue for a reason. It seems at times that you approach glimpsing the fuller gospel by some of your comments. I would like that for you.

"I am approaching the fuller gospel"...What does that even mean? I think I have a solid grasp of the full gospel. Your posts suggest that somehow I lack some major puzzle piece.
it seemed like one of many off topic posts and comments.What is up with that?
JONC
[What you have done with the OP is to take Scripture as if it were a sort of textbook. It is perhaps an error of the Enlightenment - gathering doctrines but never seeing the depth embodied in the fuller picture.]
Hopefully you are trying to help. But you sometimes are coming out of left field.
Who says I do not see the fuller picture?
This implies you do, and i do not. I am not the subject of the OP.
JonC
[You see redemption but can't quite get redemption history]

In this thread I was using quotes from Jonathan Edwards who is considered perhaps one of the greatest theologians ever. I do not think he failed to see redemptive history. This work is a classic.
When you make such comments I am not sure if your thinking is on track.

JONC
[ is that at some level you are begining to sense an error in your theology. At least that would be a preferable reason as there would exist hope God is opening your eyes to the meat of the gospel.]

You keep suggesting this. I do not share your view. In fact, I have no doubt I have a clearer view than you do of the full impact of the gospel and its place in redemptive history
JonC
[Set aside your theology for a moment and just read Scripture - read at least Genesis, Matthew and John (as it is, not as a reference book). Do this a couple of times. Then let's have this conversation]
No thanks..I am good. Again you are suggesting you are out in front and I need to catch up. I do not see it the same as you do.
JonC
[When we pull out things we see in Scripture and arrange them to our liking there is always a danger of creating ideas foreign to Scripture. Scripture deals with ideas in its own context.]
You go about things as you do, I go about it quite differently. Sure there can be danger and we need to be cautious. That being said I think we are to agressively meditate on scripture with a view to serve God and win the lost as God works in us.

 

[Iconoclast]

pt2
JonC
[But at the same time I have learned to be careful not to offer "meat" to those who have yet been weaned from the "milk". That is why I have been pointing and suggesting that you set aside theology for a time and simply read Scripture as it is presented]

For you to suggest this could be seen as offensive. I do not have thin skin , but again I will say that your view of this is way off.
JONC

You have a heart for God, and I am confident that if you are able to do this you will discover a depth of Scripture that transcends the sum of its parts.

I already do this and am more than confident that God will give me what I need to serve Him
JonC

I think your views here (and elsewhere) emphasize a danger of churches that emphasize theological concepts over Scripture itself. That is why I've illustrated with two-seed and anti-mission doctrine (not that you hold either but that you are treading dangerous ground). Perhaps we rush into systematic theology to quickly....I'm not sure. But the idea of Scripture as sort of an encyclopedia of doctrine is a growing problem that is perhaps more damaging than doctrinal ignorance as it fosters Christian infancy rather than growth.

You certainly have a right to your view. I and others have a right to our view as well.
Notice, I am not telling you what I think you need to do.

JONC

Again, @Iconoclast , I recognize your heart for God. I know that you are a brother in Christ. But I think that it is past time you seek the "meat" of the word.

Again, a sort of condescending post from you to me? You think it is "time I seek the meat of the word"?? As if you have it and I do not??
Let's make a deal... if I want you to tell me what to seek, I will ask you.
Again...I do not tell you what you need.
JONC

You cannot treat the Bible as an encyclopedia and expect to walk away with anything but a superficial and humanistic view.

Here Again; a superficial and humanistic view??? This is going on in your head not in reality

JONC

You are free to reject my view of theology (that theology must be Christ-centered and any other method that seeks God apart from Christ is religious philosophy). I agree that this is one thing that separates us.

Again, only you have a Christ-centered theology??? Are you kidding me?
You agree that this is one thing that separates us???
That is really big of you JonC
Thanks but, I will once again hold what I do
JonC

That said, it does not make my view of theology wrong.

It certainly does not make it right either

JONC
[Many stick to the milk of the issues, I think sometimes because the milk makes very little demand of us. As you continue you studies, I encourage you to prayerfully consider what is being communicated not only by theological doctrines that you see in your reading but also (and more importantly) by the Scripture as a whole. Look at the context in view of redemptive history. When you are able to do this you will see an amazing depth of Scripture that you may not have recognized in the theological expositions you sometimes seem to favor.]

Again, another tedious attack from you toward me???Now I stick to milk again
You never have given any scriptural offering of all this meat you allegedly have. Perhaps you can start your own thread and reveal these secrets you have that we do not

 

[Iconoclast]

JONC
[I know that is what you believe to be true. I've been where you are now. What I have found is that there is much more to Scripture than the sum of its parts. The Holy Spirit guides us to all truth, @Iconoclast .]

I responded with this;
1]The Holy Spirit guided the Apostles into All Truth, not us.

2]We are given the Spirit to be able to welcome the truth, but we do not have the same promise the Apostles had.

This is basic bible ...Apostolic uniqueness. This can be clearly demonstrated without a doubt, maybe not tonight as I need to sleep soon...but look at how you took what I said and twisted it. Why do you feel to do this?
One comment was about the Apostles, the other was about us having the Spirit.
then you went here;
JonC

Perhaps that is an issue, @Iconoclast .

Or perhaps not

We have to rely on the Holy Spirit to work in our lives and unveil what is revealed in Scripture.

Notice...I clearly posted that exact thing in point two;
2]We are given the Spirit to be able to welcome the truth, but we do not have the same promise the Apostles had.
So why would you suggest I do not believe this???

We cannot work apart from the Spirit. Your suggestion the Spirit only guided the Apostles may be part of the problem you are having problems identifying the meat of Scripture.

Where did I say the Spirit is not given to guide us? If you read what I actually posted it was the Apostles were uniquely promised to be guided into ALL TRUTH...YOU ARE NOT.

iF YOU ARE GOING TO QUOTE ME, DO SO ACCURATELY. Then you use this as an excuse to suggest I cannot identify the meat of scripture once again. Does this not seem pathetic to you as you read what you posted???


JONC

This is a good topic (one we will not have enough time to discuss here).

I believe that when the Spirit was sent He was sent as a helper to Christians. I do not believe that apart from God's Spirit one can discern spiritual things.

I already said that. Why do you post as if I did not say so?

JonC
[This is what some Baptists have referred to the "indwelling" of the Spirit. That you find this problematic is very interesting to me as I was not aware there were Baptists who denied this work of God in the lives of believers.]

As if I do not know what the indwelling of the Spirit is?
Then you suggest I find this problematic?
Then you have me denying this work in believers?

Martin and Biblicist were critical of you for this kind of posting. They suggested you change your ways. How could I suggest anything different???

JonC

But this is a key (probably THE key) that separates us in how we view the "meat" of the Word. I do not believe the Holy Spirit revealed to the Apostles truth and His work was done. So the "meat" of the Word is not something I view as an apprehension of knowledge, but rather the working of God.

This will be a separate thread. Your spin is once again unfortunate

 

[Iconoclast]

In another thread Jason posted this;
Whatever expansionist advocacy is, I simply know that Jesus showed that the Scriptures spoke of Himself Luke 24:25-27.

Paul stated that the seed is Christ. Galatians 3:16

Furthermore, Scripture is a unity, a thematic whole.
Genesis 3:15 the seed is promised
Genesis 12:1-3 the seed promised through Abram
Genesis 21:12 the seed called in Isaac
Genesis 25:23 in Jacob
Genesis 49:10 in Judah
2 Samuel 7; Isaiah 9:6-7 in David
And fulfilled in Jesus the Christ Luke 1&2; Galatians 4:4-5;Hebrews 2:14;Romans 16:20;Revelation 20:1-15

Regardless of the name one calls it, Bible believing people understand and accept the fact that Scripture’s purpose is to reveal God to us, and to show us the way of redemption in His Son. To claim that leads to false doctrine is an incorrect and unjust statement that absolutely contradicts the very words of Jesus in Luke 24:25-27 and John 5:39. Paul attested to this as well in Romans 15:8-13, where he tells us Christ fulfills the promises to the fathers that we might have hope in Christ and give God glory.

This fits very nicely in this thread as well.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

And what happens if Jon decides not to get involved this thread? He may decide all he would be doing is to raise the rhetorical temperature of the Board, i.e throw gas on the fire.

 

[Iconoclast]

And what happens if Jon decides not to get involved this thread? He may decide all he would be doing is to raise the rhetorical temperature of the Board, i.e throw gas on the fire.

Then I will proceed with the thread with Jonathan Edward's before it got derailed.
I was in a church where we worked through his work and it helped to unify all 66 books of the bible in the minds of many.
Certainly no one is obligated to participate.
These questions happened in a flurry on the last thread. I was not able to address the concerns until last night.

 

[InTheLight]

Wanted to read this thread but am put off with all the multi-colored, bolded fontasy.

 

[Jerome]

Wanted to read this thread but am put off with all the multi-colored, bolded fontasy.

 

[Iconoclast]

Jonathan Edwards continues,

VI. The dispersing of the nations, and dividing the earth among its inhabitants, immediately after God had caused the building of Babel to cease. This was done so as most to suit the great design of redemption. And particularly, God therein had an eye to the future propagation of the gospel among the nations.

They were so placed, their habitation so limited, round about the land of Canaan, as most suited that design. Deut. xxxii. 8. “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.” Acts xvii. 26, 27. “And hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him.”

When the language and people were scattered for a time the true knowledge of God was hidden from many people who lived in those days.
God sustained the godly line, and was longsuffering with the wicked, until the fulness of time was come

 

[Iconoclast]

VII. Another thing I would mention in this period,
was God’s preserving the true religion in that line from which Christ was to proceed,

when the world in general apostatized to idolatry, and the church was in imminent danger of being swallowed in the general corruption. Although God had lately wrought so wonderfully for the deliverance of his church, and had shown so great mercy towards it, as for its sake even to destroy all the rest of the world; and although he had lately renewed and established his covenant of grace with Noah and his sons; yet so prone is the corrupt heart of man to depart from God, and to sink into the depths of wickedness, darkness, and delusion, that the world soon after the flood fell into gross idolatry; so that before Abraham the distemper was become almost universal.

 

[Iconoclast]

For Abraham’s own country and kindred had most of them fallen off; and without some extraordinary interposition of Providence, in all likelihood, in a generation or two more, the true religion in this line would have been extinct.
And therefore God called Abraham, the person in whose family he intended to uphold the true religion, out of his own country, and from his kindred, to a far distant country, that his posterity might there remain a people separate from all the rest of the world; that so the true religion might be upheld there, while all mankind besides were swallowed up in heathenism.

God has always an eye on the godly line. He has meticulously arranged all events to lead them to salvation

 

[Iconoclast]

This was a new thing: God had never taken such a method before. His church had not in this manner been separated from the rest of the world till now; but were wont to dwell with them, without any bar or fence to keep them separate; the mischievous consequence of which had been found once and again.

Before the flood, the effect of God’s people living intermingled with the wicked world, without any remarkable wall of separation, was, that the sons of the church joined in marriage with others, and thereby almost all soon became infected, and the church was almost brought to nothing

The method that God then took to fence the church was, to drown the wicked world, and save the church in the ark
. Before Abraham was called, the world was become corrupt again. But now God took another method; he did not destroy the wicked world, and save Abraham, and his wife, and Lot, but calls these persons to go and live separate from the rest of the world.

 

[Iconoclast]

Edwards;

And then it was needful that there should be a particular nation separated from the rest of the world, to receive the types and prophecies that were to be given of Christ, to prepare the way for his coming; that to them might be committed the oracles of God; that by them the history of God’s great works of creation and providence might be preserved; that Christ might be born of this nation; and that from hence the light of the gospel might shine forth to the rest of the world. These ends could not well be obtained, if God’s people, through all these two thousand years, had lived intermixed with the heathen world.

How come no one seems to object that God had chosen to redeem people primarily from one nation?

2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

 

[agedman]

The N T hold the church was a mystery revealed at this last age.


The “seed” was not that ancestral line flowing directly from Eve / Adam culminating with the Messiah. It was the Messiah carried in the ancestral line. Because the Messiah is first fruits, it is through Him (His Word - seed) that sown in the heart of the unregenerate bears life unto harvest.

There was no OT church, it was a hidden mystery because God wanted to make redemption to both gentile and Jew.

 

[agedman]

One other problem. You seem to hold a view of God Only loving the elect.

Is all Israel His elect? “He came to His own...”.

When the Scriptures present the grace and Love of God, it is always (as best as I recall) in the light of favor that is undeserved. That is, the fact of elect is not the distinguisher or extinguisher of love.

God doesn’t distinguish between deserving or not, love or not, but makes a choice based solely upon His purpose.

Therefore, it is inconsistent to hold God only loves the elect, but rather He is as one who owns the whole land. He selects what is to be the purpose of the land. His work is not distinguished by love, but by purpose.

Or as the Scripture say, that of the same clay molds according to His purpose. If there is love, it is for the whole lump of clay, not just that small part selected for some purpose.

Does God love some more?

Certainly, as found in this line:

“See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.”

​

Doesn’t indicate that He only loved, but that the love was great and undeserved.

He selects of all He loves those to call His children.

 

[Iconoclast]

One other problem. You seem to hold a view of God Only loving the elect.

Is all Israel His elect? “He came to His own...”.

When the Scriptures present the grace and Love of God, it is always (as best as I recall) in the light of favor that is undeserved. That is, the fact of elect is not the distinguisher or extinguisher of love.

God doesn’t distinguish between deserving or not, love or not, but makes a choice based solely upon His purpose.

Therefore, it is inconsistent to hold God only loves the elect, but rather He is as one who owns the whole land. He selects what is to be the purpose of the land. His work is not distinguished by love, but by purpose.

Or as the Scripture say, that of the same clay molds according to His purpose. If there is love, it is for the whole lump of clay, not just that small part selected for some purpose.

Does God love some more?

Certainly, as found in this line:

“See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him.”

​

Doesn’t indicate that He only loved, but that the love was great and undeserved.

He selects of all He loves those to call His children.

Not all Israel was of Israel. God only has a saving love for the elect.

 

[agedman]

Not all Israel was of Israel. God only has a saving love for the elect.

Certainly, God only has Saving love for the elect, just as any parent. However, that does not present God from having love enough to prepare a place for the condemned.

God’s Love es neither a switch or rheostat. God is love, and though that love is expressed at multiple levels and ways, it is never extinguished.

How this applies to the seed is that, certainly, God had those of Israel who ere redeemed, but they were not a church.

The church (the NT states) was a mystery not revealed in the OT.

When Christ gave himself “for the church” it was for all believers, and not until his death and resurrection that the OT redeemed were united to the NT redeemed in which the Gentiles are grafted into the church, the Israel of all redeemed.

Decades ago, a preacher was foaming about God hating this or that, and His intolerance of... you know that kind of preaching.

Well, I reflected then, that unlike human capacity love, God is unthreatened by The spurning of love. He gave irregardless, because He loved.

However, it is worthy of note, that the Love of God does not extend to making all righteous as some would appoint, nor even present the power of choice to be righteous as others would froth.

God’s Love is righteous, and His Saving Love abounds to those He calls His child.

 

[percho]

Edwards;



How come no one seems to object that God had chosen to redeem people primarily from one nation?

2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

Being, they, were the only ones he did know, how did he foreknow, those, he had not known?

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Rom 8:29

 

[Iconoclast]

Being, they, were the only ones he did know, how did he foreknow, those, he had not known?

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Rom 8:29

God is omniscient. He knows all things perfectly. When the bible speaks of His special knowing of PERSONS it means His intimate knowledge of Them.
God knew about all nations, but when it says You ONLY have I known, it is speaking of His Covenant making with one nation out of all others.

 

[Iconoclast]

The N T hold the church was a mystery revealed at this last age.


The “seed” was not that ancestral line flowing directly from Eve / Adam culminating with the Messiah. It was the Messiah carried in the ancestral line. Because the Messiah is first fruits, it is through Him (His Word - seed) that sown in the heart of the unregenerate bears life unto harvest.

There was no OT church, it was a hidden mystery because God wanted to make redemption to both gentile and Jew.

Acts7
38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

What verses are you thinking of saying the church was a mystery....I know a few but want to see which ones you are thinking of?