Does God love everyone? This is a question that is asked and answered by Dr. Robert Morey and the people of his church/blog at Biblicalthought.com. If the answer given is not bad enough, the resulting practice of those who espouse it certainly is. I have posted some responses to this in their blog but my views are censored and deleted so I thought I’d share them here. I am troubled by how professing followers of Jesus Christ can say the following things so flippantly (see below) and I wonder what our response as Christians ought to be when hate speech like this comes up in the context of God and life in Christ. My friend Jeromy has a blog where we are discussing church unity and coming together under the Lordship of Christ and the question arose about what to do with people who are diametrically opposed to unity and ecumenism and even worship what appears to me to be a very different God. What do we do in such cases? Jeromy had what I think might be the only answer: Love them and pray for them and give it over to God for only God can change their hearts. Jeromy, I know you didn’t say “blog about it” so forgive me for starting this 
I was going to post the YouTube video here but am having problems uploading it. If you want to see it, go to YouTube and search for “Does God Love Everyone?” Below, however, are some comments from that discussion on Morey’s blog.
This from a blogger named Jean:
Jean 3:16
For God so hates the non-elect that He will give His only begotton Son in the 2nd coming. That whosoever does not believe in Him will perish, and not have everlasting life.
He also says:
How can an evangelist love the lost if we are not to love the non-elect? Because an elect person can be lost. The job of the evangelist (e.g. prison ministry, apologetics, etc).is to proclaim the gospel in hope of the elect to realize (Romans 5:1) their salvation. I would argue that a Biblcial evangelist would have a burden for those that are elect and have not realized it yet. Those who are not elect, the evangelist convicts.
And:
I argue that love they neighbor is NOT universally ALL humankind (I hate Osama Bin Laden Biblically)
I argue that love your enemies is NOT universally ALL enemies (within the community of believers)
In light of the above examples and 1st John 2:15 (Do not love the world OR anything IN the world).
we are NOT to love the reprobate. That doesn’t mean we are nasty or unkind. But love in light of the Matthew 5:44
And:
Becky, do you love Osama Bin Laden? How can you stare Osama in the face and tell him you love him? If you love him what does that mean? Do you have a heart tug feeling about him? What is this love?There is no biblical warrant. I hate Osama and would shoot him in the head If I had the chance (I’m sure Travis would too).
If you love Osama, you might as well love Satan. The verse is specifically talking about people right?-so perhaps the prince of darkness is loved by Jesus? This is absurd.
This is Becky’s response:
Like i said, i am speaking under normal circumstances. Yes i hate Osama bin Laden, but am i about to run into him on the street? Well if i do, my pepper spray and cell phone will come in handy.
—————————————–
There is a ton more that could be quoted but this is the general tenor of that entire thread (in fact, it is the general tenor of that entire blog). The mentality seems to be one of divide and conquer. They are right back to the age old question of “who is my neighbor?” Didn’t Jesus already cover this?
This is my comment that has not been posted (like I said, I’m censored there):
I don’t get you people. How can you say so flippantly that you’d “kill Bin Laden” and that you “hate him” and at the same time acknowledge that Jesus commands us to love our enemies. Don’t you think that whatever “love” means it is at the very least an avoidance of such rhetoric and perhaps at the very least includes not murdering him? Unbelievable.
When it comes to love, what makes you people any different from the atheists? Do you not remember Jesus’ words to the Pharisees about how they do good to those who do good only to them? Or the story of the Good Samaritan (Samaritans and Jews hated each other with the same kind of hate you people show to Bin Laden) where Jesus turns such thinking on its head and tells them to love the “other” as themselves.
Anyone can do what you people are doing. It’s a piece of cake to hate people that aren’t like us or who are the enemies of the state (kingdoms of this world) or hate those who believe differently than we do. Hell is full of such people. Jesus says that as for those who truly follow him and serve him that others will “know us by our love.” It’s a radical thing, but so is the cross. Surely no God-hater would look at you all with your hate speech and see something beautiful and compelling – something that must be bigger than yourselves and must come from God. They would only see themselves.
So what should a Christian’s response to this to be? Do we ignore it? Speak out for the God who IS love? At what point do Christians need to draw a line in the sand and say, “that is not the God who has revealed Himself to us in Jesus Christ”? Do we ever say such a thing? If not, why?
The Bin Laden thing comes with so much baggage it may be difficult to weigh it fairly. However, when I read the stories of our Savior I am struck by the fact again and again that he was surrounded by many “Bin Ladens.” They went under the banner of “Rome” and even the “Church” and they killed him. What did he say to them as he was breathing his last? “Forgive them Father, for they know not what they are doing.” Why do we think we have the right to put a bullet into the head of “Rome” or the “Church”?
Thoughts?
Filed under: Theology | Tagged: Biblicalthought, Ecumenism, Love, Robert Morey
And unfortunately, this attitude is much too common. It is ultimately why the secular world will label “Christians” as “fake” and not receive the gospel.
I agree. Some recent polls taken of non-Christians all agree with you as well. The overwhelming majority of them claim that they can’t see the true Jesus through the lens many Christians offer.
One of my favorite early writings is by Saint Athanasius. In his little book “On the Incarnation of Christ” he argues that the reason Jesus Christ came to earth as a human is because humans, who are created in the image of God and therefore are to reflect God in this world, were doing such a poor job at it and in effect making a mockery of God that Jesus HAD to come. Thus, as Athanasius puts it, “it was for our sorry state” that Jesus put on flesh.
Good to meet you!
peace,
Chad
Yea, it seems pretty clear what Jesus’ words mean when he says to love your enemy. If they take your coat, give them the rest of your clothes (your nakedness will shed light on their vileness). If they backhand you, turn your other cheek so they have to hit you like an equal. If they force you to walk one mile, do it (that is what THEY demand), then walk another for them on your own accord (that is what YOU offer). I believe that Ghandi, MLK Jr. and others were great examples of what it means to love an enemy, while at the same time showing their enemies and the world the vileness and injustice of their enemy’s actions.
As far as arguing to try to convince goes, outside of relationship, it is futile when people are embedded in their theology, fear and pain. Say your peace (if you want), then move on. If someone is willing to build a relationship, listen as you listen, learn as you learn, humble themselves as you humble yourself, then perhaps dialogue and mutual change can occur.
Like you said, people love to hate and it is a whole lot easier to do so. As far as Bin Laden goes, if we can’t love him, who can we love? Would I shoot him? Nope…not my place. I’ll leave “vengeance” to God. I fear we might be surprised when God shows love and forgiveness to even the “Bin Ladens” in our world. Funny thing is this: WE are THEIR “Bin Ladens” (or enemies).
Jeromy,
I couldn’t agree more.
You bring up an interesting point when you say that “outside of relationship it is futile” to convince others of anything, really. Yet, here we are in the 21st century and so many of us (I count myself in this crew) are used to these pseudo-relationships created via the internet. I wonder if we (generally speaking) make the mistake of thinking that because we got a short soundbite or post from someone we have earned a right to categorize or judge them as a person. We think we “know” them now and can therefore cajole them into thinking like us. I know I have been guilty of this. My (and others) attitudes would be far different, I think, if we recognized that we might think far differently about someone if we were to first sit with them first at a bar or coffee shop.
At the same time one cannot deny that valuable relationships are made via this type of media. Admittedly, they are strained and nearly impossilbe to make when the genus of these relationships is based on what we DON’T have in common rather than what we DO have in common (as this topic reflects). So what do we do in these cases? I’m just thinking out loud here, so help me out. Maybe we have a responsibility to engage such people in respectful dialogue (at least until they start censoring or deleting you) and hopefully reflecting the Jesus Christ we serve? Perhaps we do this not with the intent of convincing “them,” (because I think you are right that that is God’s job, not ours and nearly impossible to do without relationship anyways), but with the prayer that other “surfers” out there who are discerning and seeking God might get a more accurate picture of what being a Christian is about?
I dunno. I appreciate your insight.
peace,
Chad
[...] Chad got me thinking (dangerous, I know). [...]
Most of the time it is for the “sake of the others listening” that I try to respectfully engage others, but even then, I choose whom I engage carefully. Every now and then I bite the bait and engage on a controversial subject, and often I regret it afterwards. You can tell really quickly if someone cares to listen or not. I guess when it comes down to it, I would rather spend my time with those who “play nicely”. If I sense that there is no fruit that can come from a conversation, I tend not to have it—after all, time with my kid’s is far more valuable. I have been advised time and time again by my spiritual director to avoid fruitless controversies. I can share where I am at and what I believe, but if I try to convince or change then I will just end up frustrated.
I read a lot of the posts at biblicalthought and from what I see you using Jean is not the right person to quote he doesnt seem to represent the overall ideology of biblicalthought you should be quoting one of th guys in the ministry, Dr. Morey or Stephen not sure if any of the rest of them are in the ministry.
You can not call them non believers or else you are in the same fallicy you accuse them of, we will cal it the “divide and conquer fallacy” according to what I see you guys believe, is, if someone believes in the “essentials” they are a believer, baptist methodist, mormon, JW, presbyterians etc.
So how do you weed out false teachings if false teachers profess the “essentials?”
Alan,
Glad you stopped by. Welcome.
You are right about who represents the “overall ideology” at BT. I only quoted the ones I did because they were the most recent comments that caught my attention and sparked my posting of this topic here. In my opinion, it gets much worse the deeper into it you go over there.
I agree with you that we cannot call them “unbelievers.” I struggle though with wondering what, if anything, we ought to say about this. One of the things that attracted me about being a United Methodist was our inclusiveness and ecumenism. We do not so quickly shoot from the hip and pull out a heretic card or ostracize somebody because they come to a different conclusion than we. But do you think there comes a time where a person or a community needs to stand up and say, “wait a second, that idea/action/belief/whatever does not conform to the way of Jesus Christ”? When you have two people together and one teaches that Jesus hates some people and therefore I can too and another that teaches Jesus loves and died for everyone (even those we hate) than aren’t we talking about two very different objects of worship?
Some things that people make into essential I don’t think really are. I can agree to disagree with someone over modes or timing of baptism, or what exactly happens to the elements, if anything, during communion or whether or not icons can be used while one prays and so forth. My struggle is when we get to the attributes of God, such as love, mercy, justice, righteousness, etc – what do we do when we disagree deeply on these?
So to responsd to your last question, Alan, I’m not sure. I think we first need to determine what the essentials are. Care to take a stab?
peace,
Chad
Here is a non extensive list, I dont think Christianity is as easy as some people would have it, “believe in Jesus” and thats it, it takes knowladge and understanding, as well as believing and repenting.
-The Trinity, the equality of each part, and the different roles.
-Salvation, by grace through faith, that it is a gift. and why we need atonemrnt
-Infallibility of scripture
there are more but this a good start
Anything that alters these, is sin.
Alan,
I agree with you that Christianity is not a “fix-it” scheme. Billboards that read “Have you tried Jesus?” feed into this idea that Christianity is just one more self-help program to make you feel better about you. Christ died for far more than my self-esteem.
As for your start of a list, I would say there is one that trumps all of those and without it the rest are meaningless. It is what Jesus declared is what everything else hangs on: Love God with all your heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself.
I affirm the Triune God and also that salvation is a free gift (which means a lot more than most people think that means, by the way: ie. how is salvation a free gift if it is dependent upon my thinking straight about, say, the Trinity or the infallibility of scripture or any other doctrine?)
Can you define “infallibility of scripture”?
I am hesitant to label mistakes in these categories as “sin.” Unless we are defining “sin” as mistakes made out of ignorance which have no true bearing on our relationship with God in the end.
peace,
Chad
Well, Love the Lord your God is a commandment that we are told to do after we are saved by his grace, Salvation is not hanging on this commandment, the idea that this is the essential that all essentials hang on to is very man centered, it starts with a commandment that we are to fulfill not what God has done, God comes to us first and everything starts with him not what we are to do, Love is an essential, and comes out of what God has done for us. Everythiing must hang onto who God is.
I saw this on biblicalthought , it has to do with this article.
I just want you to feel welcome here. He(Jean) doesn’t represent us, he’s(Jean) not part of our ministry, and I didn’t want you to assume that he(Jean) speaks for us. We rebuke his(Jean) behavior, yet we will welcome him(Jean) back if he(Jean) shows himself to be repentant. Since Dr. Morey has been on A.M. radio stations in the past (Bob Morey LIVE!), he attracts alot of those late night A.M. radio conspiracy-theory-types. He also attracts the seminar rats (a loving term that we have given to the conference junkies!). So, moving forward – be prepared for more. By their fruits…
There is also this dont know if you saw it. A Christian Manifesto. You claim to be evangelical(i think) take a look.
http://www.anevangelicalmanifesto.com/manifesto.php
“infallibility of scripture”
Perfect, written by God through Man, all 66 books.
It is written for correction, encouragement, instruction etc.
Alan,
I must have misunderstood you. In your list of “essential” you included belief in the Trinty and infallibility of scripture. I assumed then that you weren’t talking only about how one is saved (I trust you don’t think that a person is only saved when they “think rightly” about those matters). In that spirit I was offering what I see to be the utmost essential of the Christian life: Love God and neighbor.
As for the rest of your post, I’m not sure what you mean by all that. I haven’t been on biblicalthought for awhile now and even if I did go there it is pointless – they delete anything I say. I’m weary of all that.
What is your story with all of that there?
Oh, one more thing. Your posts keep going into my spam folder to be moderated. Normally, after I approve the first post from someone all future posts go in automatically. Are you using the same name/email address each time? That might be why your posts get delayed.
peace,
Chad
Hello,
I am not a member nor am I a staff member at Faith Defenders. I posed a very controversial question that over 95% of Christians disagree with due to our post-modernist era of emotional (”devotional”) means of thinking. The majority of Christians (or professing Christians) are unfortunately, bardus, but that is simply due to the Church not paying their bills. An example of this would be Reformed MaMa (Cindy?) who dips into the mystical side of thinking.
Just for clarification, the hate of the reprobate was regarding those who practice unrighteousness perpetually (Revelation 21:11). My sister is not a Christian and I don’t hate her. There are degrees of depravity in practice, but not in position. Osama practices unrighteousness perpetually and is viewed as a hated enemy. I take this stand within the position of being a Christian citizen of the United States (Psalm 139:21-22).
Those who read my posts carefully and actually examine the text at play via prayer and exegesis only deserve the right to comment on my conclusions. Those who are theological deadbeats should leave it up to the Christians of discipline and maturity to handle such matters.
Jean Cauvin
Jean,
You said: I take this stand within the position of being a Christian citizen of the United States (Psalm 139:21-22).
The problem I see with this is that we are not called to distinguish between who is and who is not our enemy based on our worldly citizenship. I doubt God really cares that you are a citizen of the United States. God certainly cares that you be a citizen of the kingdom of Heaven, which plays by very different rules and a much higher standard than the kingdoms of this world.
Thus, I take the stand that we are to love Osama and pray for him. I take this stand within the position of being a Christian in the Kingdom of God.
Is this difficult to do? You bet it is. Yet it is part of what we are called to do as disciples of Christ who die to themselves, opt to be last rather than first, turn the other cheek, etc, etc.
As for who has the right to comment on your conclusions that you post, well, when you post something on a forum like this or any blog, anyone has the right to comment. I trust that you can find the grace that has been given you to show to others and refrain from future characterizations like “theological deadbeats.” I debated posting your comment for that reason and will delete future ones that show a lack of respect for others.
peace.
Go Chad!
Chad,
I’m now in your house, so you can censor me if you’d like as you did the last post. But just for clarification, I did not agree with censoring/removing you from biblicalthought.com.
My citizenship does not deem me to hate Osama, my Christianity does. Knowledge, reality, ethic, beauty, etc, are dependent on the Word of God Alone and Islam is an enemy of the Christian faith.
You did not address the Scripture in my last post nor any of the other scriptures I posed via my arguments in biblicalthought. You simply are using your feelings (Tradition/Experience?Reason) to determine reality. We should use Scripture ALONEa. This is what I meant by a deadbeat. Pick up a Bible and use it. Either refute or mute.
God hates Obama (Psalm 5:5; 1 John 2:15) and so do I.
I don’t hate all non-Christians. This is a adhominem that I think has bee assumed. Since we don’t know among the elect the ones that have been chosen by God, it is absurd to hate all non-christians. This is not my positon. My position is to hate the reprobate who practice unrigheousness perpetually (e.g. Hitler).
People are quick to judge those who they think are saved, but when it comes to those who are not saved, you are mean or unloving if you say somebody is damned. This is double-talk that most Christians commit. If we can assume salvation we can assume condemnation.
We judge a Christian by his fruits (lifestyle/doctrine). Thus the anti-thetical means of this would be bad fruits. So if a person perpettually commits bad fruits (rape, murder, sodomy, etc e.g Aleister Crowley), then via the fruits they exibit, they are reprobate (I John 2:19).
The Bible gives/gave Biblical warrant for Christians to hate Hitler and to pray for his destruction (Psalm 143:12).
Jean Cauvin
Jean,
Just a few random thoughts in response. If you have not read anything else around here than you would not perhaps know I am in Ethiopia awaiting to bring home the 2 children we are adopting. As such, blogging and having a cordial chat with you on this subject is not at the top of my to-do list. You are in luck, however, because breakfast is not to be served for another 20 minutes
First, I did not censor your last post.
Second, I do not espouse sola scriptura (nor does anyone, really, when you get to the heart of it). If you do not care to use reason in your exegesis or in your views of history and people than there is not much I can say to convince you otherwise. If you believe tradition is vaccuous and useless than you truly are a new reformer and blazing a great new frontier. I wish you luck with that, but I prefer to assume I know far less than the many who have gone before me seeking to love God and neighbor as themselves. As for experience, well, if the living Word of God has not impacted your life in such a way that you can speak from the heart, than I pray that will change as you continue in your journey to know God.
Third, using a poem (Psalm 5:5) is not the best way to go about proving you are in the right to hate your enemies. As for 1 John 2:15, this is a call to hate something specific, as the next verse describes: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life (1 John 2:16). One could argue, even, that to hate these things includes hating the way the world teaches us it is OK to hate our enemies and to strike back with equal venom whereas God’s Kingdom is one that teaches very different ethics. ( I’m sure the Republican Party would get a kick out of your “Obama” slip!)
Fourth, you said:
“I don’t hate all non-Christians. This is a adhominem that I think has bee assumed.”
I apologize if you think I mischaracterized your direct quote, where you said:
” In light of the above examples and 1st John 2:15 (Do not love the world OR anything IN the world).
we are NOT to love the reprobate. That doesn’t mean we are nasty or unkind. But love in light of the Matthew 5:44″
I’m glad you don’t hate all non-Christians. Do you only hate the ones that are threats to the United States? What is the litmus test that allows you to finally hate someone as oppossed to just “not love” them?
How do you reconcile your use of Psalm 143:12 with Jesus’ command to pray for our enemies or with his rebuke of the disciples when they wished to call down fire from heaven to wipe out their enemies, the Samaritans?
Can’t promise I will be around much these next few days. Besides, there are others here who may wish to jump in who can share with you the truth of God’s love far better than I could.
Grace and peace, Jean.
Hi Chad,
I’m not sure if you are distracted or else simply not paying attention. You have commited several logical fallacies. You have misrepresented my position. I do not have time to back track to the letter A and correct you in all your errors back to letter Z.
I encourage you to go back and read carefully via logically thinking.
It’s one thing to disagree with a person, it’s another thing to misrepresent your opponents position.
You equivocate Reason with reason. We are not to use our human means of Reason (e..g Descartes) to determine Truth. Our Reason is evil. The only reason we should adhere to is God’s reason. Tradition/Creeds is suppose to reflect Scripture, not vice versa. Thus tradition is NOT a means to determine truth. Scripture alone is where we go for truth. So you commit the logical fallacy of equivocation several times over. Since most of the bloggers on here are void to logic, they can’t see what’s going on.
Subjective experience is also NOT how one adheres to truth. This is mystical Humanism. Again, you say you adhere to sola scriptura but in practice you use Humanistic subjective Rationality to determine truth. This was done in Genesis 3 via the snake.
Regarding all the other misunderstandings you have, I simply don’t have time. One of your problems of misunderstanding is that you are probably not a Biblical Christian. And you also don’t understand Reformed thinking so you are coming at it from a different planet.
I don’t know you and you are probably among the reprobate. I can’t observe if you are perpetually in unrighteousness. You could be elect and simply not converted yet? But as of now, I don’t know you so I don’t hate you (more information is needed). If I knew you and you did not practice unrighteousness, then I would not hate you. I have many pagan friends that are nice people.
Matthew 5:44 via inference is in retrospect to those who perpetually practice unrighteousness. Those who do so identify themselves as enemies of God and enemies of His children.
Enjoy Africa,
Jean Cauvin (Jude 3)
Jean,
You choose, based on what you understand from scripture, to take a stance of hating your enemies (it seems). I choose, based on what I understand from scripture, to take a stance of loving my enemies. We all make choices based on our limited human understanding. As a human, I have a tendency towards error, so if I am going to error, I will choose to error on the side of grace and love. That we are loved and forgiven by God through Jesus: You, me, our enemies—or fellow humans created by God in God’s image. I know we differ, but that does not change God’s love towards either of us, nor them.
Hi Jeromy,
To err is human is false. This is a cliche in our society that is nowhere found in Scripture. Humanity by default does not equate error (Another post, perhaps). The lack of perfection talked about in the Bible is talking about moral perfection (e.g. Romans 3:23).
Yes, I hate my enemies. But the issue is determing whom my enemies are. Upon recognition of perpetual evil, then they are my enemies because I can see that they are God’s enemies. Even if you don’t go this far, upon inference of Matthew 5:44 one would have to adhere to the love of enemies within the community of believers.
We are not suppose to go by our gut. If you investigate my arguments based upon the verses used on biblicalthought.com you can see part of my argument. I would encourage you as Psalm 1 does to mediate on the Scriptures with prayer to come to this understanding.
Chad is probably not a Christian because we had a discussion on inerrancy on biblicalthought.com. Since he denies the words of Christ, he denies the person and work of Christ.
Thanks for the kindness. I always like talking to people I disagree with. It helps me and I hope it helps them stretch their minds to think Biblically.
Sola Deo Gloria!!!
Jean Cauvin
Jeromy
“You, me, our enemies”
You lump these together to say God loves All the same way, do you believe this? We are all created in the image of God, but we all obtained the image of Satan in the garden with Adam and Eve. If we are all Loved the same, why would I repent from anything? There is no distinction in man or women, races or ethnic backgrounds, but there is a clear distinction from Genisis to Revelation of favored people Noah, Israel, Abraham, Disciples, Prophets…. Which are in contrast to those that practice wickedness, (the men and women I mentioned would have gone the same route yet they found favor with God.)
I saw that Chad made mention of the people in Darfur, we as human beings should be helping these people, but thier suffering doesnt negate the fact they practice witchcraft which is sin, (of course not all) but in my trips to africa and the middle east it is clear who thier god is, just as Romans 1 speaks.
So I say this to ask you to define Love, salvation, sin
Hi Alan,
Scripture teaches that Christ died for us while we were yet sinner thus proving God’s love for us. John 3 teaches that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world and did not come to condemn it, but to save it.
When we repent we turn towards the God of Love, turning away from a way of life that only leads to death, not life. You repent because you discover just how much God loves you and therefore you too can learn to love in much the same way, even your enemies.
Jesus did not die for only those people he “likes” or “loves.” He died for the whole human race, past, present and future. All of humanity died in Christ and ALL humanity were raised in Christ. Scripture doesn’t say that only those God loves, but ALL humanity, even the witchcraft practicing people of Darfur.
I am trying to understand how your understanding of God’s love doesn’t make God’s posture towards you, me or anyone else solely dependent upon my ability to first repent and love God. It seems as though you are saying God loves only those who love him. Don’t you think scripture is clear that we only know love because God first loved us? Does God not love someone today but then changes his mind tomorrow when the sinner repents? Does God then decide to love wheras just yesterday God hated or thought nothing of?
You said we all obtained the image of Satan in the Garden. Where does this idea come from? Scripture is quite clear that we all have been created in the image of God. Are you saying that the image of God can be overrun by the image of Satan? To say we have the “image of Satan” seems to me to give Satan Creator-like ability, something that scripture clearly denounces for Yahweh is the only one who created and the only one that can therefore depart an “image.”
Just some random thoughts. Hope you are well.
peace,
Chad
Hello,
Here are some theolgical fallacies that Chad wrote:
1) “You repent because you discover just how much God loves you and therefore you too can learn to love in much the same way, even your enemies.”
This is incorrect. Study I Thessalonians 1:9. Via the text/Greek, repentance comes after we come to God. We come to Christ because the Father draws us to Him (John 6:44). Thus we don’ t repent BECAUSE of the discover of how much God loves us. We come to God and via understanding of His love, thus that causes us the desire to repent.
2) “Jesus did not die for only those people he “likes” or “loves.” He died for the whole human race, past, present and future. All of humanity died in Christ and ALL humanity were raised in Christ.”
This too is absurd. Its terminology is based on universalism. Though Chad may not be a universalist. Christ did not die for Hitler or Osama Bin Laden. He died for His own (John 3:16 cf 1 John 2:15). John did not die for all of human kind. The word world (cosmos) is talking about a class. (see John’s book on Revelation 9:12 and 1 John 2:1-2 and John 1:10).
But since Chad denies the inerrancy of Scripture he can pick and choose whatever he pleases I suppose.
Jean Cauvin
Hi Chad,
I can’t for the life of me figure out how arguing/debating about such issues help anyone out in their spiritual lives.!
I also believe that the more I read from bloggers like Jean, you’d like her comments to remain on here because she is proving YOUR original point exactly !
Re: Jean “Chad is probably not a Christian because we had a discussion on inerrancy on biblicalthought.com. Since he denies the words of Christ, he denies the person and work of Christ. ”
To that, I MUST say:
It is sooooo important to be careful not to become the judge, as we all only have one judge and that is God.
I found ONE criteria for being saved :
Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
****************************************************************************************************************
Also, interesting to note: Jesus thought it the greatest commandment of all to LOVE. He surely did not say to love only those who YOU pick and choose, Jean!
The Greatest Commandment
28One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
29″The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.[e] 30Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[f] 31The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[g]There is no commandment greater than these.”
32″Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. 33To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
34When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.
And Lastly,
Proverbs 20:3
It is an honour for a man to cease from strife: but every fool will be meddling.
Re:@jean: “Those who read my posts carefully and actually examine the text at play via prayer and exegesis only deserve the right to comment on my conclusions. Those who are theological deadbeats should leave it up to the Christians of discipline and maturity to handle such matters. ”
This is such an inflammatory statement! Thou shalt agree with me or be labled a theological deadbeat!!!
To all : Time is slipping away. There is no doubt we are in the last days. Energy should be spent in prayer, and bringing others to Christ, not so called “debates” People are drawn by the Holy Spirit, God, who Is LOVE.
Such debates no doubt have our enemy hopping up and down with glee over the wasted energy involved in fighting each other.
Hi Sweetiegirlz,
Your response is based upon emotional feelings. Scripture tells us to use our mind as a sacrifice unto him (Roman 12:1-2). You self-refute yourself because you enter into the debate. A theological deadbeat is one who doesn’t use the mind, but rather uses the gut.
There is a righteous judgement talked about in John 7:24. We are also suppose to judge ourselves to see if we are in the faith ( 2 Corinthians 13:5). We are to judge/test all things and hand on to what is true (I Thessalonians 5:21). We are to contend earnestly for the faith because of professing Christians that don’t possess Christ (Jude 3-4, 1 John 2:19). And Jesus says you shall know them by their fruits. The fruits consist of doctrine, lifestyle (Romans 5:7, Galatians 5:21-22)
You quote Romans 10:9 which is an example of an emotional understanding. You forget 10:10. The heart (kardia) in the New Testament is not the organ, but rather the whole being. So thus according to 10:10 an 10:9, we possess before we profess.
I was misrepresented by Chad via pasting various excerpts that he deemed fit. We are to love God with our whole being but this can’t be done until He shows us love first by saving us (Eph 1:4; 2:1-6, John 5:44, Acts 13:48).
You haven’t showed me any sweetness, but rather emotional goobledegook.
Take Care.
Jean Cauvin
Whatever.
Sweetiegirlz,
Thanks for your words. I couldn’t agree more.
grace and peace,
Chad
Jean,
Hi. Please keep in mind that you are a guest here. If you cannot converse with fellow Christians or even those you deem as unChristian with respect and even a touch of humility than I will no longer allow you to post here. I have no problem with disagreeing but please do so without the arrogance. I’m sure you can understand.
If you are still reading than let me say a few things about your post #24.
You said that I am wrong for saying that we repent because we discover just how greatly God loves us and thus we turn to Him and learn to love others. You then correct me by claiming this: We come to God and via understanding of His love, thus that causes us the desire to repent.
Hmm. So in other words, the thing that causes us to repent or gives us the desire to do so is that we understand how much God loves us. Jean, if you aren’t careful you are going to begin sounding a lot like me
You then go on to call me absurd for believing that God loves the whole world and Christ’s death was for all, not just some. You then further accuse me of denying the inerrancy of scripture. My response to that is this: It is only with great theological gymnastics that one comes to the conclusion that “world” does not mean “world” in the context of John 3:16. Furthermore, it is perhaps the irony of ironies that those who deny the plain reading of scripture in the most simplest of matters then accuse someone like myself of denying scripture’s inerrancy. I do not believe nor have I ever believed that we can “pick and choose” what we want to believe from scripture.
One last thing. You said, and I quote: John did not die for all of human kind. (emphasis mine)
Of course John did not
Just wanted you to know that us “theological deadbeats” are reading closely.
peace,
Chad
Hello,
An obvious typo with John,
Hi Sweetie,
Why can’t you think and articulate with me your thoughts. You really should start acting a little more like Ann Coulter. She is a good example for women in terms of logic and thought. You would never hear her say “whatever.” My sister use to say this in the 7th grade.
Chad told me via a post that he adheres to Scripture in a similar way Barth viewed it. This is heresy and non-Christian. Thus by definition Chad is not Christian.
If you decide to kick me off because I’m embarrassing you so be it. If you kick me off then you are really not very loving to me. Since we are enemies you’re suppose to love me with kisses and not kick me off your blog.
Instead of using Scripture to discern what the word world means when John uses it when he uses it, you use your UMC method of approach based upon Humanism.
You are not exegetical. You don’t know Greek and your feelings are at play here. How about trying to exegete the 3 worlds in John 1:10, or contrast the word world in 1 John 2:1-2 vs. Revelation 12:9 (Remeber, John wrote Revelation). Or the different worlds in I John 2:15 and the world of John 3:16.
Since you don’t know Greek, you simply guessing based upon cultural gut. The word world can mean many things based on the context. I assume you have a basic concordance to view this with ease. Does God love aliens from other planets? I believe cosmology (world) is also the study of the cosmos (the universe).
Quit pouring 21st century mysticism into the 1st century authors of Scripture.
Jean Cauvin
Jean,
FYI: I have had over 3 years of New Testament Greek plus a year of translating the LXX. It is why I disagree with you on most of your exegesis.
Your last post is an example of the sort of replies that I won’t engage in. I’ll let it stay – not because it is worthy of a response but because it doesn’t require one.
Take care, Jean.
Chad
1Sa 13:13 Samuel said to Saul, “You have acted foolishly; you have not kept the commandment of the LORD your God, which He commanded you, for now the LORD would have established your kingdom over Israel forever.
1Sa 13:14 “But now your kingdom shall not endure. The LORD has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart, and the LORD has appointed him as ruler over His people, because you have not kept what the LORD commanded you.”
Of course, we realize that this passage refers to David as being the man after God’s heart.
Psa 139:21 Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?
Psa 139:22 I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.
Psa 139:23 Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me and know my anxious thoughts;
Psa 139:24 And see if there be any hurtful way in me, And lead me in the everlasting way.
Why does David have this attitude? Is it unGodly? If so, why isn’t he rebuked for this?
Joh 15:18 “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you.
Joh 15:19 “If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.
Joh 15:20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.
Joh 15:21 “But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me.
Joh 15:22 “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin.
Joh 15:23 “He who hates Me hates My Father also.
Joh 15:24 “If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin; but now they have both seen and hated Me and My Father as well.
Joh 15:25 “But they have done this to fulfill the word that is written in their Law, ‘THEY HATED ME WITHOUT A CAUSE.’
In this passage John seems to identify the “world” with “they, them, their”. Verse 25 definitely points to physical Israel, but there are other passages that seem to point to the Gentiles as the “world”
Look, I’m all for the love of God. I desperately need it and His kindness led me to repentance. I have always believed that God loves everyone. But I must admit that this belief has been based on upbringing and not so much on my own sincere investigation of the Word.
My UNOFFICIAL position is that God is WILLING to love anyone (Acts 10:34,35) but He does not necessarily love everyone (Rm 9:13), and even in the Luke’s account there are requirements; (fear of God and doing what is right).
Psa 5:5 The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity.
Psa 11:5 The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, And the one who loves violence His soul hates.
Lev 20:23 ‘Moreover, you shall not follow the customs of the nation which I will drive out before you, for they did all these things, and therefore I have abhorred them.
Pro 6:16 There are six things which the LORD hates, Yes, seven which are an abomination to Him:
Pro 6:17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, And hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that run rapidly to evil,
Pro 6:19 A false witness who utters lies, And one who spreads strife among brothers.
Hos 9:15 All their evil is at Gilgal; Indeed, I came to hate them there! Because of the wickedness of their deeds I will drive them out of My house! I will love them no more; All their princes are rebels.
Joh 14:21 “He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”
Will those who do not love Jesus be loved by His father?
Joh 15:23 “He who hates Me hates My Father also.
Psa 139:21 Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?
Psa 139:22 I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.
Thanks for your opinion, Chris.
Is this Chris P. from .info?
peace.
Jean Cauvin, are you a parody of reformed theologians? With that name and some of the views you’ve expressed, including the comment “We should use Scripture ALONEa”, it makes me wonder, and I don’t want to waste my time correcting someone who’s posting for a joke. If not, you’re giving reformed theologians a bad name – please carry out proper exegesis on texts that people are correcting you on before continuing to spread hatred. I myself believe in Biblical inerrancy. With that in mind, below are some errors in your thinking.
You said:
“the hate of the reprobate was regarding those who practice unrighteousness perpetually (Revelation 21:11)”
Revelation 21:11 says, in the NIV: “Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal”
The context also has nothing to do us having a hatred for the reprobate, them being people who practice unrighteousness perpetually.
You also said:
“Osama practices unrighteousness perpetually”
Who are you to make this judgement? Romans 2:1 “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.” Certainly you may view yourself as less of a sinner than Osama, but a sinner you are. Before God saved you, were you not a slave to sin, just as Osama is? Of course you were: “But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted.” Romans 6:17. Who are you to say that Osama will not repent of his sins and trust in Jesus? It may look unlikely from our perspective, but it is God who makes the final judgement at the end, not us here on earth now. So aside from the fact that you shouldn’t be making judgements about whether Osama will be saved or not [note: I'm not sure if you were doing that or not, but I've said what I've said in case you were], we are not called to hate anyone. However, you said:
“My citizenship does not deem me to hate Osama, my Christianity does”
“My position is to hate the reprobate who practice unrigheousness perpetually (e.g. Hitler)”
“The Bible gives/gave Biblical warrant for Christians to hate Hitler and to pray for his destruction (Psalm 143:12)”
Firstly, who are you to decide what constitutes practising unrighteousness perpetually? Secondly, how do you determine what constitutes practising unrighteousness perpetually? Thirdly, you use Psalm 143 to try to justify your position. The verse you use reads “In your unfailing love, silence my enemies; destroy all my foes, for I am your servant”. This does not call on Christians to hate their enemies. It is a Christian asking God to silence his enemies and destroy them for him. You claim you are a good exegete, and you rightly emphasize its importance. Yet you fail to carry out exegesis well. The Word of God is not contradictory; the clear aspects of scripture should be used to interpret the less clear. The words of Jesus in Matthew 5:43-44 are crystal clear: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”. Firstly, chronologically Jesus came after David. Thus if David’s example was to pray that God would destroy his enemies, but Jesus said “You’ve heard it said ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy’ but now I’m telling you that you should love your enemies and pray for them”, we should go by what Jesus said. Which is very clear. Secondly you obviously take the verse from the Psalm to mean we should hate our enemies. The quote from Matthew shows that you have misunderstood the Psalm. I think it’s clear that the Psalm isn’t saying that we should hate our enemies on it’s own personally, but that’s irrelevant I guess.
You also try to use 1 John 2:15 to justify your position of hating people. That verse and the verse after it read “Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world.” Someone has already mentioned it, but by taking verse 15 on its own, out of context (which is poor exegesis; in fact it probably shouldn’t even be called exegesis), you have managed to fit your pre-conceived idea of hatred into the verse, rather than let the entire passage speak for itself. We are not to love anything in the world, according to verse 15, which you use. But what are the things in the world John is talking about? Verse 16 makes it clear what John is talking about: “the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does”. We are called not to love cravings, lust and boasting. Instead we should “cling to what is good”, as Paul says in Romans chapter 12. The verse in 1 John does not call us to hate anybody, and so it does not contradict the teaching of Jesus in Matthew chapter 5.
Next, you said:
“We judge a Christian by his fruits (lifestyle/doctrine)”
This assertion is false. The scripture you’re referring to actually says we should judge our Christian leaders by their fruits, not ordinary Christians.
You said:
“So if a person perpettually commits bad fruits (rape, murder, sodomy, etc e.g Aleister Crowley), then via the fruits they exibit, they are reprobate (I John 2:19)”
1 John 2:19 reads “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us”. Who is the “they” John is talking about? We can see from the previous verse “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.” So, verse 19 says that antichrists went out from Christians but were not really Christians. How do we know they’re antichrists? By the fact that they went out, or left, rather than ‘continued with us’. This does not mention any of the sins you listed above. It mentions nothing about perpetually committing any sins. Now, verses 22-27 of that same chapter will give us a bit more help, particularly with the questions “what does it mean to be an antichrist?” and “why was John writing?”. The verses read:
“Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist — he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. And this is what he promised us — even eternal life.
I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit — just as it has taught you, remain in him.”
So, questions for you. Once you have identified an antichrist (who is someone who denies the Father and the Son) what does John suggest we do? Are we to hate them as “reprobate”? Or are we to avoid being led astray by them? The context of the passage and verse 26 make is absolutely clear.
Your hatred of people you have judged to be reprobate is unbiblical.
You wrote:
“I don’t know you and you are probably among the reprobate. I can’t observe if you are perpetually in unrighteousness. You could be elect and simply not converted yet? But as of now, I don’t know you so I don’t hate you (more information is needed). If I knew you and you did not practice unrighteousness, then I would not hate you. I have many pagan friends that are nice people.”
I still think you might well be just trying to wind people up, , and reading this makes me even more suspicious, but in case you’re not: playing with the truth in a way that will confuse and mislead people is wrong.
You said:
“Matthew 5:44 via inference is in retrospect to those who perpetually practice unrighteousness. Those who do so identify themselves as enemies of God and enemies of His children.”
Matthew 5:44 reads, as we have already seen, “But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”. “In retrospect”, meaning looking back (from where?), and “via inference” (what are you inferring from what?) Jesus is talking “to those who perpetually practice unrighteousness?” Or did you mean Jesus is talking about those people? Anyway, in what way is it perpetual? Most of the people who are enemies with you will still have a lot of their lives left, which is time that God can still use to draw them to himself. Doesn’t perpetual mean that they never stop being unrighteous? That’s a judgement made by you that is not for you to make. Everyone is an enemy of God until he places his faith in Jesus. It’s as simple as that. We do not know who will place their faith in Jesus, nor do we know when. Until they die, we are to love our enemies.
You said:
“Chad told me via a post that he adheres to Scripture in a similar way Barth viewed it. This is heresy and non-Christian. Thus by definition Chad is not Christian.”
You cannot make a judgement about who is a Christian and who is not. Chad may well be a Christian, who just has more things to learn (e.g. about the inerrancy of scripture). It is simply not for you to judge that. If God is God, he will help those who truly seek him to grow in Christlikeness. I think you should gently correct errors where you perceive them, but you should do so in a spirit of love and not judgement, and after prayer: “Be kind and tender to one another. Forgive each other, just as God forgave you because of what Christ has done” (Ephesians 4:32) “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15) “Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted” (Galatians 6:1). There are times when Christians are called upon to “talk to” or try to correct a fellow Christian. It is wise to spend time in prayer first, to check our motivation and ask for guidance. That’s why I’m correcting you right now, Jean.
OR,
Thanks for your post and your thoughts. Jean Cauvin hasn’t been around since May and I don’t expect that he is reading.
Although, if he took what you said to heart it could be useful
grace and peace.
Yes, I realised after posting that I was a bit late. But at least if anyone else reads this (I found it myself when searching Google for the question “Does God love everyone” – it’s a result in one of the first few pages at least) then they’ll have some (hopefully biblically based) criticism of Jean’s view to read and think about.
Anyway that’s all off-topic really. Your original post raised a lot of good questions, ones I’m struggling with myself at the moment.
You said:
“My friend Jeromy has a blog where we are discussing church unity and coming together under the Lordship of Christ and the question arose about what to do with people who are diametrically opposed to unity and ecumenism and even worship what appears to me to be a very different God. What do we do in such cases? Jeromy had what I think might be the only answer: Love them and pray for them and give it over to God for only God can change their hearts.”
I think that’s true, we’ve got to pray for people. But at the same time, surely if someone’s wrong we should talk to them about it and get to the point where we agree with each other (either we realise we were actually wrong, or we show them why they’re wrong)? Maybe we should only do this with people we know in person and avoid doing it on the Internet? We should also keep in mind 2 Timothy 2:23:
“Don’t have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels.”
So we’d have to be careful to judge what disagreement is foolish and what is not. Also there’s Titus 3:9 which might be relevant (but again I think is in the context of Christian leaders):
“avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless”
One problem I have is knowing that if someone is thinking incorrectly about a ’secondary issue’ and they aren’t corrected, that may well lead to incorrect thinking on other issues. But when is it your place to correct?
Which leaves me with your final series of questions:
“So what should a Christian’s response to this to be? Do we ignore it? Speak out for the God who IS love? At what point do Christians need to draw a line in the sand and say, “that is not the God who has revealed Himself to us in Jesus Christ”? Do we ever say such a thing? If not, why?”
I’d love to know the answers to these questions. There’s probably a right time and a wrong time, and we should probably pray and ask for wisdom before we take any action like that.
That video by “Dr Bob” seemed to be given in a spirit of self-righteousness and not one of love and gentleness. I often judge stuff like that on its fruits. But he seemed to make some scriptural arguments, which take a lot of time and effort to look into individually to see if he’s right.
For one thing, he mentioned “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated”. In the context of Malachi I believe it’s clearly talking about nations of people. But you can make a good case that in Romans Paul is talking about individuals. Does this mean God emotionally loved Jacob and emotionally hated Esau? No, I don’t think it does, after doing some reading into it. Jacob was loved, and what did that mean for him? He was chosen. Romans 9:13 is in the context of predestination. Jacob was chosen, not by works, and the scripture says “Jacob I loved”. Paul doesn’t talk about Esau (/the Edomites) other than quote Malachi. So I think all we can do is look at God ‘loving’ Jacob meaning that Jacob was chosen, and thus see God ‘hating’ Esau as God rejecting him.
That interpretation nothing to do with a vitriolic, emotional hatred that Dr Bob seems to talk about in his video. But is it worth spending time posting about it? Maybe, I don’t know. I guess I just did post about it! But not on his website – after all you said he censored you. I think it is worth taking the time to look into it, as with everything – check everything by the scriptures to see if what is said is true, like the Bereans in Acts 17:11.
Hi OR,
I have not seen this site since August but just happened to find it today.
The righteous hate evil, while the evil love evil. Since chad and his gang are non-Christians, we can deduce that their hate for righteousness and love of evil will certainly mush together.
Not everything in the Bible is fun or enjoyable (e.g. hell). But it is not up to us to use our own Humanistic reasoning to come up with truth. For example, the UMC’s (Chad’s denomination) quadrilateral is extremely pagan as to their approach to Scripture. This has led many within this pagan group to deny a literal hell, inerrancy, sin (e.g. homosexuality), Jesus is the only way, logic etc. This is what you would expect.
And Chad has fallen into one (if not more?) categories (inerrancy). Since the probability of errancy exists in his paradigm, then the probability of all doctrine exist, including the atonement of Jesus Christ.
The only way to KNOW of Christian truths, is the understanding of the perfect inerrancy standard. Since Chad does not have such a standard, he is like a wondering pagan with no place to go but south.
Paganism is, paganism does!
My brother has recently become a UMC minister. He is mad at me now for discussing his pagan connections. The senior pastor at his church adheres to the “Jesus Seminar’s” view of things (via a personal phone call with him). While the UMC has not fully endorsed this yet, it allows wiggle room since it is already pagan. The issue at this point, is the waiting for the UMC to further its darkness within the gates of hell.
This is what you would expect. Just like their sister pagan, the Episcopal Church, they are becoming a servant for Satan as well.
The ecumenical orgy attempts to stand WITH everybody. If you stand with everybody, you stand for nothing.
OR, unless the Holy Spirit grabs your dead corpse from the grave, you will remain as a wimpy pagan.
If God loves you, you will be His child and destined for heaven. If God hates you, your destiny is hell. Since you are emotional somewhat, your knowledge of that fact may not occur until the flames of darkness surround you.
I encourage you to study Galatians regarding the issue of Ecumenical orgies which seem to incline you. After that, read John’s gospel.
I will continue to hate the rapists, terrorists (Osama), child molesters, and serial killers. You have the right to love terrorists and rapists. If a serial killer were to kill one of your loved ones, please e-mail me back as to the love that you would have for that serial killer.
God’s hates rapists. He does not have warm fuzzy feelings towards terrorists. This is a false Jesus and a false understanding of Christianity that has swept the post-modern culture of America.
Your emotional arguments are based upon the philosophy of the hypocrites.
If you continue to live as a pagan, then I respectfully will regard you as one of my many enemies against THE TRUTH of my Lord Jesus Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. (Psalms 139:21-22, I Corinthians 15:3-4).
Respectfully,
Your Apparent Enemy (Jude 3).
(institutio@gmail.com)
And Jesus said: Love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you.
You will be in our prayers, Jean.
Something more should be said here.
I was tempted to delete Jean’s comment but decided against it. Left to itself, it really does not deserve any response. I think most if not all of those who read here will recognize that.
However, I have a concern for those reading who might be curious about Jesus. Search the scriptures. You will find that Jean’s comment is as far from the Jesus of the gospels as one can get. Jesus Christ taught his followers to love their enemies, to not return evil with evil, to pray for those who persecute us. He told the religious of his day that they should not only love those who love them back (or be kind to those who are kind in return) because even the pagans (Jean’s favorite word) do this. This is the same Jesus who prayed over the very people who nailed him to a cross: Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.
The God Jean has described in his comment is truly the God of man’s own making. It is a God that looks no different from you or I, only to a greater degree. It is our fallen nature to make us want to hate another or to seek revenge or to dislike those who are different from us or who persecute us. It takes a new creature, one filled with the Holy Spirit, to be able to forgive those who hurt us and pray for even our enemies. That is a life lived in the way of Jesus. It is the way of love. Jesus said: they will know you by your love. May it be so with all of us who call Christ our Lord.
grace and peace
Hi Chad,
You deny the inerrancy of Scripture. Thus, everything you say about Jesus or theology is within the probable. Logically speaking, since the Bible is not perfect, then logically your emphatic conclusions are also not perfect.
There’s no way to tell. It’s all one big guess from the gut. Whatever “feels” right must be right?
So you have no 100% guarantee about Jesus or anything else regarding theology. In order for one to claim absolute, 100% positive theology, one must claim absolute, 100% inerrancy towards the source they get their theology from.
Logic 101 here.
And this is why many United Methodist “Pastors” have been succumbed to the occult and heresy (e.g. Jesus Seminar).
What does Chad think of the Jesus Seminar? Are they Christians or on their way to hell (if hell exists). Of course, the new-age answer is to NOT judge (c.f. John 7:24, II Corinthians 13:5, I Thessalonians 5:21, etc).
So, those interested in Scripture will be called to Scripture by the Holy Spirit. The great Methodist Christian, George Whitfield pointed this out during many of his revivals.
Thus, Chad, since you lack confidence via your lack of “knowing” of inerrancy towards the Bible, ALL your refutations are nothing more then a guess of the gut. You have not a leg to stand on.
I speak with the confidence and gift of knowledge reflect in the 100% perfect absolutely inerrant Bible (II Peter 1:20-21, II Timothy 3:16, etc).
Chad and I simply disagree, We can now end this subject for good. If anybody has questions regarding the Bible and Christianity please e-mail me. You may also challenge me if you want.
All arguments for Chad’s position are for the pagan non-Christian side.
I should end by saying that I am not a member of Morey’s group nor do I belong to the official moderator board of Biblical Thought.
Though if pressed, it is my opinion that Dr. Robert Morey would agree with me at least in SOME degree.
Chad, come back to biblicalthought.com. Are you censored permanently? If so, nothing I can do about that. Though I’d love to have you. Your paganism helps Christians on there think through the issues and side with orthodoxy.
Thanks Chad for your correspondence. Even though you are an enemy of the faith and probably destined to the gates of hell, we can still be friendly and respectful.
Respectfully,
Jean Cauvin (Jude 3).
institutio@gmail.com
Wow. It is amazing what the cats can drag in.
Thanks for offering your opinion, Jean.
Take care.
(and no, don’t look for me at BT)
Oh, P.S. Your first mistake is your arrogant assumption that any of us can have “100% positive theology.” God forgive us for thinking you can be contained by our finite minds.
Hi Chad,
You can’t even have 1% accurate theology. Since Scripture is full of errors (via your belief) , your confidence is also errant.
You cannot refute me on ANYTHING anything via absolute standards. This is all an emotional guess. This makes your arguments invalid and absurd.
Thus, every thing you say (1 % even) is within the probable of ERROR as well as truth.. Thus, the fact that Jesus died for your sins is PROBABLE, but not absolute.
You are like a Professing Christian acting like a Skeptic. Even if the truth did exist, we would not recognize it ABSOLUTELY.
Thus, you are without knowledge of that very facts of Christianity and thus your ignorance will allow your second death to encroach upon you.
Perhaps we will meet in the future somewhere, who knows. If so, I’ll buy you a beer and say hi.
Respectfully,
Jean Cauvin (Jude 3).
institutio@gmail.com
Jean Calvin? French Calvinist? I’m glad to hear you have God all figured out, 100%, absolutely, inerrant. I’ve been looking for someone who does—’cause I know I don’t—so I guess my searching has come to an end. I can now die in peace knowing that heaven will have at least one person in it. It makes my heart sing to know that you’ll dodge the fires of hell through your perfect knowledge of God’s in-finite grace. Congratulations!
I would email you my questions about God, but I feel so unworthy and small. I hope you understand…
So true, Jeromy. Who needs the Holy Spirit when we have Jean Cauvin?
Jean, debating you is pointless. If your comments were not such a perversion of the Good News Jesus Christ proclaimed they would be funny. I pray that you one day come to know the infinite love and grace of your Father in heaven and reflect that love to God’s good world.
I doubt you and I will share a beer together anytime soon but one day in glory we can laugh over how little both of us knew of this ineffable, infinite and mysterous God who is love, and yet still found our way home.