Should God have compassion?

[whatever]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Whatever,

I don't know where you took english, but "Should God not have compassion" means "Shouldn't God have compassion" in every quality english class in the nation, so the OP did NOT misquote scripture.

Hey TS,

I've read the OP for what must be the 50th time, and it still does not say "Shouldn't God have compassion". It says, and I quote:

SHOULD God have to have mercy on such a city? SHOULD He?

"Should I not?" means "is it wrong for me to?" "Should God?" means "is God obligated to?" Those are very different questions. God is not telling Jonah in chapter 4 that He is obligated to have mercy on Nineveh.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi J Authur;
You're seeing what you want to see in scripture and what you see just isn't there.

James..
well...no need to keep going around with ya. I showed as you asked...the Bible says...GOD CHOOSE to send. Its up to us to believe. Now that sir..is the facts

I agree Jonah was elected and sent to the ninevites however this in no way elects the Ninevites.

I was only joking as I'm sure you know..about MY GOD is better then your God...because of what you said. Mike...this is no joke. No matter what your views are...never,,NEVER EVERY say God can not do it. God is so powerful that he could have made you 1 hour ago with all your thoughts in place and you not even know it. GOD CAN DO ANYTHING. NEVER put God in your little box and say NO God!! If God wanted to elect before we were born just as the Bible says...He can.

I never said God cannot do anything I said He
didn't there is a difference.

you mean the story about God can do as He wishes? Yes a few verses above it says he CHOOSE one son over another...before they were born. God is very powerful...and can do as He wishes..right Mike?

Read Jeremiah 18 there is no mention of Esau and Jacob there and you get the full meaning. I gave you the refference. What's the matter it's scripture it won't bite you.

Mike..
********
God has saved many men because of there actions. Election does not insure Salvation.
James...
*********
Hum. So again you limit God. God will only save based on what we do for God. God will love us...if we love Him.

Limiting God my friend is believing that He can't save some one. Election is not not a pre-condition for Salvation.

That is not my God. My God saves with GRACE.

Where did I say He doesn't save by Grace?. Election and Grace are not the same thing. I'm sorry you don't believe in an all powerful God. You believe in one who is limited to saving only those pre-elected. Talk about a box.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Larry

I don't want to discuss you.

Then why do you keep talking about me.

You are the one who made it about you in the first post on page six.

Not so Larry it just isn't there.

I simply responded to some false charges and misguided comments you made.

Not so again Larry you didn't respond to the subject of the thread. You responded to me personally.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[timothy27]

Com now Luv Light do not twist beliefs with words. Jarthur I am sure believes in an all-powerful God that i not limited. I am sure he believes God is powerful enough to save all, but does not. There is a big difference in this belief and the one you have attributed to him.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Timothy;

Com now Luv Light do not twist beliefs with words.

I haven't twisted anything. Do you believe that God will only save the elect? If you do then you limit God.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[timothy27]

It does not limit God, just because I believe He only saves the elect does not mean that he can not save everyone. This is not limiting. If some is powerful enough to save all yet chooses not to does not mean they are limited.

 

[ILUVLIGHT]

Hi Timothy;
Scripture never says that God will not save any but those who do not believe in Him.
Calvinist say that the non elect will be sent to hell. That they can't believe because they are not elect and saved first.

May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

[timothy27]

I know what Calvinist believe and it does not limit God.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by ILUVLIGHT:
Hi Larry
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I don't want to discuss you.

Then why do you keep talking about me.</font>[/QUOTE]Because you keep asking questions like this about yourself, or making statements about yourself.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> You are the one who made it about you in the first post on page six.

Not so Larry it just isn't there.</font>[/QUOTE]It is actually page 5, not page six. Look at the first post on page five. There, you turned the conversation to you.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I simply responded to some false charges and misguided comments you made.

Not so again Larry you didn't respond to the subject of the thread. You responded to me personally.</font>[/QUOTE]That is wrong. Go back to page four and look at my posts. They are all about the topic of the thread, until you made your false charge on the top of page five. It is there for all to see. You are wrong. Your comments about the topic were misguided, then you made false charges about me.

May Christ Shine His Light On Us All

He has already. It is right there in His word for you to believe. So let's look at it.

Your charges about limiting God are some more of the misguided assertions I was talking about. Calvinism does not limit God in anyway. You are ignoring what the Bible says about election.

YOu say Scripture never says that God will not save any but those who do not believe in Him. That is simply wrong. The Bible does say that God will not save any but those who believe in him. You have added a "not" that makes the sentence entirely inaccurate and unbiblical. Belief is the requirement for salvation.

Then you say Calvinist say that the non elect will be sent to hell. This is the teaching of the Bible.

Then you say That they can't believe because they are not elect and saved first.This is wrong, and has been corrected numerous times. No one is saved before they believe. Period. Why do you persist in that argument? Why have you not learned. Calvinism teaches that salvation comes after belief, not before. Here is the order.

Election before time ( Eph 1:4; 2 Thess 2:13).
Belief (2 Thess 2:13).
Salvation (Acts 16:31; Rom 10:13; etc).

It is clear from passages such as 2 Thess 2:13 and 1 Tim 2:10 that election and salvation are two different things, and that election precedes salvation.

Change your theology to fit the Scriptures. You will find life to be much better.

 

[TexasSky]

Whatever,

You knowledge of language is weak.

"Should he not" is just a fancy way of saying "Shouldn't he," and "shouldn't he," is a fancy way of saying "should he have to have" means the same thing.

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by ILUVLIGHT:
Hi Timothy;
Scripture never says that God will not save any but those who do not believe in Him.
Calvinist say that the non elect will be sent to hell. That they can't believe because they are not elect and saved first.

May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

Hi Mike,

Sorry, I am very bust right now and it makes it hard to keep up with posting. Maybe you have never been told this, But I would like to think you have. Calvinist places no limits on God. God can do anything He wishes. Lets look at this in list form.

C= Calvinist A=Arminian

1) God could save anyone.

C agree
A agree

2) God could and has the power to save the whole world.

C agree
A agree

3) God invites all to Him

C agree
A agree

4) Gods love is Great, it is where all love comes from.

C agree
A agree

5) God can hate..

C agree
A WOW NOW!!!! God can not hate.


God can do as he wills. The point of romans 9 is not to say he hates a son or a nation. Its to show that can CAN at His own will choose to do as He wills to do. Romans 9 tells of God the potter molding each man the way he wills. Is this fair? Calvinist say yes...for God is in control. God has to power to send Katrina to judge sin...or because he just wanted to send a storm. God can give Jonah a guord....or God can take it from him. God can let satan "test" us....all to HIS glory.

Yet Arminianism says...God can't elect...even when the Bible says he can.

God can't hate...even when the Bible says He can. Just like your point to look at yet another passage. Mike, this does not help. If you say it is not a person, then its a whole nation of people. Mal. 1 says God will hate Edom, Esau, ...FOREVER". So if its a nation as you claim, any one born from the line of "esau" God hates. Now...i happen to believe, in progressive revelation. The NT holds precidence. The full view of the meaning of the bible is placed in the NT. We can see this in Paslms when david wrote the very words of Chrsit in the cross. I feel david had no idea he was doing this when he penned the words. yet the Holy Spirit directed daivid to write the right words. So in the NT we now see that it was a prophecy of Christ death. Like-wise, The words in the OT of God hating Esau, we are told what they mean in Romans 9.

It was do to show ELECTION just as romans say. God choose to reject cain...and cain came to God on His own. Yes their was a "blood" picture, But God could have took cains offering and loved him and also tell him he needs to offer a blood offering too. Yet..he did not. And this was Gods choice.

If God is not in full control, Gods love would be no good to us. If God can not control his love, how can we count on His grace and have any hope?

God is also HOLY and hates sin. If God was not in control, God could not be holy. Sin would over take the world and God.


God is holy and hates sin and is the JUDGE! If God is not in full control, how could God Judge?

God shows mercy to some and not to others. (romans 9). If God was not in full control, God would have no power to show mercy and we all would be on our way to hell.

This is the main stay for Calvinism. I do not control God. If God is not in control, He is not God.

So..to answer you....

God can save the whole world. He does not...and as to why..that is up to Him.

God will also send some to hell. Those that go to hell are sinners taking a path away from God, and/or lefting up other things...or self.


I need to go to church...talk to ya later


In Christ...James

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Whatever,

You knowledge of language is weak.

Now you're gonna make me cry.

"Should he not" is just a fancy way of saying "Shouldn't he," and "shouldn't he," is a fancy way of saying "should he have to have" means the same thing.

If that's the case then why not just say it the way the Bible says it? If "should I not have mercy" means "I am obligated to have mercy" then why did Bob see fit to change it to "why should God have mercy"?

Should I not post on this topic?

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
So many entertaining ways "not to respond" to the points raised.

Failed arguments are made the more obvious in their failings by noting their consistent need to avoid the devastating text of scripture raised against them. That string of unanswered points exposes their flaws and all the conjecture and speculation needed to prop up false teaching. Falsehood needs to consistently gloss over and ignored inconvenient texts of scripture so that the adherents may cling to bias and tradition over exegesis in the Word of God.

But then to suppose that “time passing in silence” will suffice as “The response” to the unanswered texts so devastating to a flawed doctrine – is to embrace even deeper self-deception. It is running and hiding from the most blatant of inconvenient facts – all in service of a “good story”.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1586/4.html#000048

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BobRyan:
I am playing catch-up reading all the posts since I signed on last -- but here is what I "suspect" our Calvinists have been doing...


1. Question in OP

What is GOD's argument IN THE TEXT for why HE SHOULD have mercy on them?

Answer: God EXPLICITLY states that HE created them (whereas Jonah did NOT create the plant) and they are ignorant and there are many animals in the city. God gives THESE REASONS for why He SHOULD have mercy INSTEAD of saying "I am sovereign I can do what I want so why SHOULD you be telling Me I Should NOT do as I please either way??"

These details already pointed out in my Sept 5 post.

But the Likely Answer from Calvinists: "Dead silence". (Calvinists engaged in Detail-avoidance)

2. Speaking of my "Sept 5 posts"

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
What should be the Calvnist response when God says...


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exodus 32:10
"Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was Moses a "good Calvinist" or a bad one?

(And then there is Abraham).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surely JohnP can get 100% behind God's sovereign statement in THIS post if not in the OP eh?

So does that make Moses a "bad Calvinist"??

Likely answer so far from Calvinists: "Dead Silence"

(Calvinists engaged in Detail-avoidance - fleeing from the text)

Of course my "expectations" might be wrong. I will now read through the post history to see if we really do have dead silence on the specific points brought out on page 1 of this thread.

</font>[/QUOTE]WEll - I was not "surprised" to say the least. The calvinists were as predictable as sunshine in August.

Oh well. They seem to have no answer on this one!

Again.
</font>[/QUOTE]I just find it so hard to believe that the 2 main questions of this thread "must be avoided" at all costs by the Calvinists.

Surely you guys have something to say on the OP challenge and the others listed on page 1!!

I mean - all these pages have passed - and "still nothing"??

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
I just find it so hard to believe that the 2 main questions of this thread "must be avoided" at all costs by the Calvinists.

Surely you guys have something to say on the OP challenge and the others listed on page 1!!

I mean - all these pages have passed - and "still nothing"??

Dear Bob,

I would love to answer your two questions, but my "knowledge of language is weak" and so I am having a hard time figuring out what your two questions are. Could you post them by themselves, without reposting all of that other stuff, maybe like this?

1. This is question 1?

2. This is question 2?

Thanks,

whatever

 

[BobRyan]

I realize these 7 sentences are probably pretty daunting when posted long with the 6 sentences that form question #2.

So I am posting them "by themselves" in an effort to encourage Calvinists to respond to the actual questions raised on page 1.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1586/4.html#000048

Originally posted by BobRyan:
I am playing catch-up reading all the posts since I signed on last -- but here is what I "suspect" our Calvinists have been doing...


1. Question in OP

What is GOD's argument IN THE TEXT for why HE SHOULD have mercy on them?

Answer: God EXPLICITLY states that HE created them (whereas Jonah did NOT create the plant) and they are ignorant and there are many animals in the city. God gives THESE REASONS for why He SHOULD have mercy INSTEAD of saying "I am sovereign I can do what I want so why SHOULD you be telling Me I Should NOT do as I please either way??"

These details already pointed out in my Sept 5 post.

But the Likely Answer from Calvinists: "Dead silence". (Calvinists engaged in Detail-avoidance)

Notice that in this example "God is asking" the question?

What is HIS question?

"SHOULD I not have mercy"

Who is He asking? Jonah?


What would Calvinist say to the question?

"NO you SHOULD NOT"??
"YES you SHOULD"??

What ARGUMENTS did God give for why HE SHOULD?

#1. Because there are MANY what? Wicked people?
#2. Because the wicked people are what? Ignorant?
#3. Because there are many animals?

Indeed - we have to ask why THESE facts are being offered by God as "reasons" for His conclusion?

(As already noted in this thread) the Calvinist answer WOULD have been "I SHOULD NOT be criticized for ANY choice I make at all because I AM sovereign and YOU are not".

How FAR from that answer is the list of REASONS God gives?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Now for question #2 -- numbered "still" as question #2?

Originally posted by BobRyan:
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1586/4.html#000048


2. Speaking of my "Sept 5 posts"

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
What should be the Calvnist response when God says...


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exodus 32:10
"Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Was Moses a "good Calvinist" or a bad one?

(And then there is Abraham).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surely JohnP can get 100% behind God's sovereign statement in THIS post if not in the OP eh?

So does that make Moses a "bad Calvinist"??

Likely answer so far from Calvinists: "Dead Silence"

(Calvinists engaged in Detail-avoidance - fleeing from the text)

Of course my "expectations" might be wrong. I will now read through the post history to see if we really do have dead silence on the specific points brought out on page 1 of this thread.

</font>[/QUOTE]WEll - I was not "surprised" to say the least. The calvinists were as predictable as sunshine in August.

Oh well. They seem to have no answer on this one!

Again.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]

Get it -- Abraham negotiating with God

Moses negotiating with God.

God says to Moses "Stand aside -- let me alone that I may destroy"

Calvinists "claim" that EVEN if God says that about their own children they will gladly stand aside and REJOICE in that destruction.

HOW UNCALVINIST was Moses' reaction.

How UNCALVINIST God's response to Moses' reaction.

The same goes for Abraham.

God does not say "I am not sovereign today Abraham so please barter with me for lives of the people in Ninevah AS IF your arguments matter to Me".

Abraham asks "SHOULD NOT the judge of all the earth do justly"??

Well - can Abraham be the judge of that? Does he ask a good question? DOES he test that point with a valid argument?

Apparently so!!

But of course I WOULD say that - I am Arminian.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Jarthur001]

Bob...

********************

Oh well. They seem to have no answer on this one!
********************
Don't be a fool Bob ...right when you think we are gone...POW.right in the tummy


I have not been on as much and have tried to get back in the flow. I have read your post 3 times...and maybe its me..but i don't get your point. Just ask what you need to ask and stop dancing around. If you have a verse..post it and let me give it a try. I may look up the wrong verse. Post your verse..tell me why it hurts my view...and let me have a go.

fair?


now...go to it

the 1st verse is...and my 1st problem is...?


In Christ...James


BTW..i think i'll start clipping your "best sayings" like you do others.


1)..
" They seem to have no answer on this one!"

 

[whatever]

Dear Bob,

I counted 19 question marks in your first "question" and and eight question marks in your second "question". Remember, my "knowledge of language is weak", so I am having trouble figuring out which question mark goes with the question and which ones do not. So, could you try again? For me, your friend, could you just ask your two questions without copying in all of that other nonsense?

Thanks again,

whatever

P.S. - I did notice that you quoted Jonah 4:11 correctly. I appreciate it.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Bob, I answered your question.