Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does God So Love the World? (John MacArthur)
OnePlace.com ^ | July 21, 2005 | John MacArthur

Posted on 08/01/2005 8:16:45 PM PDT by buckeyesrule

Does God So Love the World?

by: John MacArthur

Love is the best known but least understood of all God's attributes. Almost everyone who believes in God these days sees Him as a God of love. I have even met agnostics who are quite certain that if God exists, He must be benevolent, compassionate, and loving.

All those things are infinitely true about God, of course, but not in the way most people think. Because of the influence of modern liberal theology, many suppose that God's love and goodness ultimately nullify His righteousness, justice, and holy wrath. They envision God as a benign heavenly grandfather-tolerant, affable, lenient, permissive, devoid of any real displeasure over sin, who without consideration of His holiness will benignly pass over sin and accept people as they are.

Liberal thinking about God's love also permeates much of evangelicalism today. We have lost the reality of God's wrath. We have disregarded His hatred for sin. The God most evangelicals now describe is all-loving and not at all angry. We have forgotten that "It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31). We do not believe in that kind of God anymore.

We must recapture some of the holy terror that comes with a right understanding of God's righteous anger. We need to remember that God's wrath does burn against impenitent sinners (Psalm 38:1-3). That reality is the very thing that makes His love so amazing. Only those who see themselves as sinners in the hands of an angry God can fully appreciate the magnitude and wonder of His love.

In that regard, our generation is surely at a greater disadvantage than any previous age. We have been force-fed the doctrines of self-esteem for so long that most people don't really view themselves as sinners worthy of divine wrath. On top of that, religious liberalism, humanism, evangelical compromise, and ignorance of the Scriptures have all worked against a right understanding of who God is. Ironically, in an age that conceives of God as wholly loving, altogether devoid of wrath, few people really understand what God's love is all about.

How we address the misconception of the present age is crucial. We must not respond to an overemphasis on divine love by denying that God is love. Our generation's imbalanced view of God cannot be corrected by an equal imbalance in the opposite direction, a very real danger in some circles. I'm deeply concerned about a growing trend I've noticed-particularly among people committed to the biblical truth of God's sovereignty and divine election. Some of them flatly deny that God in any sense loves those whom He has not chosen for salvation.

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

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

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

Pink was attempting to make the crucial point that God is sovereign in the exercise of His love. The gist of his argument is certainly valid: It is folly to think that God loves all alike, or that He is compelled by some rule of fairness to love everyone equally. Scripture teaches us that God loves because He chooses to love (Deuteronomy 7:6-7), because He is loving (God is love, 1 John 4:8), not because He is under some obligation to love everyone the same.

Nothing but God's own sovereign good pleasure compels Him to love sinners. Nothing but His own sovereign will governs His love. That has to be true, since there is certainly nothing in any sinner worthy of even the smallest degree of divine love.

Unfortunately, Pink took the corollary too far. The fact that some sinners are not elected to salvation is no proof that God's attitude toward them is utterly devoid of sincere love. We know from Scripture that God is compassionate, kind, generous, and good even to the most stubborn sinners. Who can deny that those mercies flow out of God's boundless love? It is evident that they are showered even on unrepentant sinners.

We must understand that it is God's very nature to love. The reason our Lord commanded us to love our enemies is "in order that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Matthew 5:45). Jesus clearly characterized His Father as One who loves even those who purposefully set themselves at enmity against Him.

At this point, however, an important distinction must be made: God loves believers with a particular love. God's love for the elect is an infinite, eternal, saving love. We know from Scripture that this great love was the very cause of our election (Ephesians 2:4). Such love clearly is not directed toward all of mankind indiscriminately, but is bestowed uniquely and individually on those whom God chose in eternity past.

But from that, it does not follow that God's attitude toward those He did not elect must be unmitigated hatred. Surely His pleading with the lost, His offers of mercy to the reprobate, and the call of the gospel to all who hear are all sincere expressions of the heart of a loving God. Remember, He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but tenderly calls sinners to turn from their evil ways and live.

Reformed theology has historically been the branch of evangelicalism most strongly committed to the sovereignty of God. At the same time, the mainstream of Reformed theologians have always affirmed the love of God for all sinners. John Calvin himself wrote regarding John 3:16, "[Two] points are distinctly stated to us: namely, that faith in Christ brings life to all, and that Christ brought life, because the Father loves the human race, and wishes that they should not perish." [3]

Calvin continues to explain the biblical balance that both the gospel invitation and "the world" that God loves are by no means limited to the elect alone. He also recognized that God's electing, saving love is uniquely bestowed on His chosen ones.

Those same truths, reflecting a biblical balance, have been vigorously defended by a host of Reformed stalwarts, including Thomas Boston, John Brown, Andrew Fuller, W. G. T. Shedd, R. L. Dabney, B. B. Warfield, John Murray, R. B. Kuiper, and many others. In no sense does belief in divine sovereignty rule out the love of God for all humanity.

We are seeing today, in some circles, an almost unprecedented interest in the doctrines of the Reformation and the Puritan eras. I'm very encouraged by that in most respects. A return to those historic truths is, I'm convinced, absolutely necessary if the church is to survive. Yet there is a danger when overzealous souls misuse a doctrine like divine sovereignty to deny God's sincere offer of mercy to all sinners.

We must maintain a carefully balanced perspective as we pursue our study of God's love. God's love cannot be isolated from His wrath and vice versa. Nor are His love and wrath in opposition to each other like some mystical yin-yang principle. Both attributes are constant, perfect, without ebb or flow. His wrath coexists with His love; therefore, the two never contradict. Such are the perfections of God that we can never begin to comprehend these things. Above all, we must not set them against one another, as if there were somehow a discrepancy in God.

Both God's wrath and His love work to the same ultimate end-His glory. God is glorified in the condemnation of the wicked; He is glorified in every expression of love for all people without exception; and He is glorified in the particular love He manifests in saving His people.

Expressions of wrath and expressions of love-all are necessary to display God's full glory. We must never ignore any aspect of His character, nor magnify one to the exclusion of another. When we commit those errors, we throw off the biblical balance, distort the true nature of God, and diminish His real glory.

Does God so love the world? Emphatically-yes! Proclaim that truth far and wide, and do so against the backdrop of God's perfect wrath that awaits everyone who does not repent and turn to Christ.

Does the love of God differ in the breadth and depth and manner of its expression? Yes it does. Praise Him for the many manifestations of His love, especially toward the non-elect, and rejoice in the particular manifestation of His saving love for you who believe. God has chosen to display in you the glory of His redeeming grace.

[1]Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1930), 29-30.

[2]Ibid., 314.

[3]John Calvin, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, William Pringle, trans. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 reprint), 123.

Adapted from The God Who Loves © 2001 by John MacArthur. All rights reserved.

• Grace to You (Thursday, July 21, 2005)

Brought to you by OnePlace.com.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; Mainline Protestant; Ministry/Outreach; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS: calvinism; church; elect; evangelism; predestination
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 951-971 next last
An interesting article by John MacArthur.
1 posted on 08/01/2005 8:16:46 PM PDT by buckeyesrule
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule

bookmark


2 posted on 08/01/2005 9:18:23 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock; RnMomof7; xzins; P-Marlowe; Corin Stormhands; Revelation 911
I am troubled by the tendency of some-often young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine-who insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe. I encounter that view, it seems, with increasing frequency.

It's not just "young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine".

3 posted on 08/01/2005 10:08:22 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule
"We must never ignore any aspect of His character, nor magnify one to the exclusion of another. "

Since the baby boom generation has discarded the concept of holiness, many think of God as little more than Santa Claus for grown-ups ("...he sees you when you're sleeping... he knows if you've been bad or good..."). Toss in some Darwinism taught as proven fact in all public schools, and what was once the foundation of our civilization is now scoffed at as childish superstition. Problem is, the society we're living in now is built almost entirely on sand.

Methinks we'll be seeing the wrath of God again very soon.

4 posted on 08/01/2005 10:18:39 PM PDT by oprahstheantichrist (...or the false prophet at the very least.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oprahstheantichrist
Since the baby boom generation has discarded the concept of holiness

That's a mighty broad brush you paint with.

5 posted on 08/01/2005 11:26:47 PM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: oprahstheantichrist
Methinks we'll be seeing the wrath of God again very soon.

Often enough, I can't wait.. :-)

6 posted on 08/02/2005 12:19:26 AM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

Oop, just realized that's not very PC.. Ah well..


7 posted on 08/02/2005 12:20:31 AM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots; Dr. Eckleburg; Frumanchu
I am glad to hear this from John MacArthur. I think he pretty well holds his ground on God's sovereignty, too, keeping him true to his calvinistic roots.

I'm deeply concerned about a growing trend I've noticed-particularly among people committed to the biblical truth of God's sovereignty and divine election. Some of them flatly deny that God in any sense loves those whom He has not chosen for salvation.

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

God can love the "world," save the believers, and judge the unbelievers.

8 posted on 08/02/2005 1:54:39 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xzins

There are many aspects of God's Love toward His Creation. I think MacArthur strikes an important balance between the over-emphasis of God's Love above all His other attributes, and the tendency of some to limit that Love in ways that are clearly not in keeping with scripture. Both extremes are equally guilty of mis-stating God's Love and Wrath. It is unfortunate that some see this only as a way to take another pot-shot at those who embrace Reformed doctrines.


9 posted on 08/02/2005 3:32:28 AM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

I am one who upholds "God as Love" as a scriptural indicator of God's central characteristic. However, I see nothing in MacArthur's article that I would disagree with. (Note that I'm not speaking of our calvinist differences here.) His wrath, his choices, his sovereignty, etc. will never contradict his love (and vice versa.)


10 posted on 08/02/2005 3:55:52 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

correction: "God IS love."

How come you never see the typos until after you click the post button??? :>)


11 posted on 08/02/2005 3:57:53 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule
Praise the Lord!!! Thanks to the Da Vinci Code The Lord is able to respread Truth through folks rediscovering Gnostic teachings!! Halleujah!! Glory unto God Almighty=>)
12 posted on 08/02/2005 4:36:15 AM PDT by Ff--150 (The Blessing of the LORD Maketh RICH--no sorrow added to it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule; xzins
The fact that some sinners are not elected to salvation is no proof that God's attitude toward them is utterly devoid of sincere love. We know from Scripture that God is compassionate, kind, generous, and good even to the most stubborn sinners. Who can deny that those mercies flow out of God's boundless love? It is evident that they are showered even on unrepentant sinners.

Surely His pleading with the lost, His offers of mercy to the reprobate, and the call of the gospel to all who hear are all sincere expressions of the heart of a loving God. Remember, He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but tenderly calls sinners to turn from their evil ways and live.

I will agree that the offer of mercy to the reprobate and his call of the gospel to all who hear are sincere expressions of God's love, but only if the offer is sincere. In order to make the offer sincere, God must grant to all to whom the offer is extended the ABILITY to respond to that offer. Otherwise the offer is illusory. If the offer of salvation is illusory, then the expression of love is equally illusory.

So what exactly is MacArthur trying to say?

13 posted on 08/02/2005 5:19:31 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; nobdysfool; xzins; Dr. Eckleburg; Gamecock
I will agree that the offer of mercy to the reprobate and his call of the gospel to all who hear are sincere expressions of God's love, but only if the offer is sincere. In order to make the offer sincere, God must grant to all to whom the offer is extended the ABILITY to respond to that offer.

What does ability have to do with the sincerity of an offer? I don't see how the two are linked. The offer is the offer irrespective of anyone's ability.

Otherwise the offer is illusory. If the offer of salvation is illusory, then the expression of love is equally illusory.

That's true only if you accept the premise that sincerity depends on ability. A premise I have yet to see proven so I don't accept it.

14 posted on 08/02/2005 5:27:45 AM PDT by ksen ("He that knows nothing will believe anything." - Thomas Fuller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

He is on the horns of the absolute foreknowledge dilemma.

Yet, we, too, are confronted by that same dilemma. If God foreknew those who would fail and be destroyed, then from the beginning He knew those on whom His love would ABIDE and REMAIN. From the beginning God knew of the fall and of His plan to offer Christ as the remedy for sin, and this was before the sin ever took place.

Our answer is that those who received the fullness of His love were worth it to Him. That all the lostness truly caused our Lord grief, but that the promise of those who received His abiding love made it all worth while.


15 posted on 08/02/2005 5:45:29 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ksen; xzins
The offer is the offer irrespective of anyone's ability.

I can't help but notice that you did not address how that offer is an expression of Love toward the reprobate. If the offer is illusory, if the recipient of the offer cannot accept it and the offeror knows that when the offer is made, then the offer is illusory. If the offer is illusory, then the expression of love that the offer represents is also illusory.

MacArthur wants it both ways. He wants to pretend that God loves the reprobate and expresses that love by offering him salvation, while at the same time he knows that God never intended that the person hear the offer and made the offer in such a way that the person could not hear it.

16 posted on 08/02/2005 5:48:55 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: xzins; nobdysfool
"However, I see nothing in MacArthur's article that I would disagree with."

I'm a little surprise that you would agree with the above statement. Quite frankly I'm not sure I agree with the above statement.

There are many who would argue that God loves everyone equally and that He sent His Son to save them. There are others who would argue that God has created some for destruction and some for His glory for whatever reason. In my mind these two opposing views are easier to reconciled with the many verses that God does not show partiality (Eph 6:9, Rom 2:11, Gal 2:6, etc.) than to say that God loves everyone but not equally.

Somehow I think MacArthur is off base on this one or I'm missing the point.

17 posted on 08/02/2005 5:53:59 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

God foreknew who would be damned.

Therefore, he does not "love all alike." While His love for all is sincere, it is different in that He knows who will remain in Him. I imagine that one difference for those who are lost is that it is a grief-filled love.

Nor do I think God is "compelled by some rule of fairness." I do not think God is bound by a set of "rules." I think that God's nature determines His actions, and that His actions are free (those of a free being.)


18 posted on 08/02/2005 6:01:25 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; xzins
Somehow I think MacArthur is off base on this one

I suspect most of the GRPL would agree with you.

19 posted on 08/02/2005 6:03:26 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ksen
What does ability have to do with the sincerity of an offer? I don't see how the two are linked. The offer is the offer irrespective of anyone's ability.

I agree. Pelagius' main objection was that the command to obey implies the ability to obey. While the natural ability exists, the moral ability does not by virtue of the complete lack of desire to obey. They could obey if they wanted to, but they don't want to and will not want to apart from the work of the Holy Spirit.

That's true only if you accept the premise that sincerity depends on ability. A premise I have yet to see proven so I don't accept it.

A good point. If ability is necessarily a part of sincerity, then God was insincere in commanding us to keep the whole Law since none of us have the ability to do so.

I will say that I do agree with MacArthur insofar as there is a tendency to run from the smarmy, lovesick-teenager God to the opposite extreme of God having no love whatsoever in any form or fashion for the reprobate. All men are the image-bearers of God (even though that image be corrupt) and have inherent worth as His creation. I believe grace to be a measure of love, and as such God shows His love to all men in the grace poured out indescriminately upon them.

20 posted on 08/02/2005 6:10:14 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins; Revelation 911; Buggman; blue-duncan; connectthedots; The Grammarian; jude24
I am troubled by the tendency of some-often young people newly infatuated with Reformed doctrine-who insist that God cannot possibly love those who never repent and believe. I encounter that view, it seems, with increasing frequency.

He's been lurking here?

How many times have we heard precisely that argument?

21 posted on 08/02/2005 6:12:02 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands; xzins
How many times have we heard precisely that argument?

Actually I really thought I'd heard that argument from MacArthur. Maybe I was wrong.

I am quite surprised at this article. Maybe we should make MacArthur an honorary Neener.

22 posted on 08/02/2005 6:31:31 AM PDT by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins
Maybe we should make MacArthur an honorary Neener.

Probably as legitimate as making President Reagan a GRPL.

23 posted on 08/02/2005 6:36:38 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
*** That's a mighty broad brush you paint with.***

I'm thinking that's an easy "yes". The brush ain't broad enough.


When is the last time you saw a congregation sit in silent fear of the awesome power and holiness of God Almighty?

The church in America is sinful because it doesn't fear God.

I see Him proclaimed mainly as a genie, an uncritical psychiatrist or a boyfriend.
24 posted on 08/02/2005 6:39:04 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus
I see Him proclaimed mainly as a genie, an uncritical psychiatrist or a boyfriend.

Boy, is THAT the truth!

25 posted on 08/02/2005 6:43:17 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule; All

It is a pretty stupid idea that God somehow wants all to be saved yet he only elects some.

No, God only wants his elect saved.

He only loves his elect.

He has mercy upon the lost with his common grace, but he does not love them. A holy God can't love evil.

As is recorded in the Psalms, "GOD HATES ALL WORKERS OF INIQUITY."


26 posted on 08/02/2005 6:45:37 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buckeyesrule

Thanks for posting this article. Good read.


27 posted on 08/02/2005 6:50:21 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

He is wrong on this.

It is patently absurd that God would love everybody but then only love only a few enough to save them.

This would make God a respector of persons, MacArthur! Just in a different way from how the Arminians make God a respector of persons.

God ONLY loves his elect.

He grants mercy to the non-elect with his common grace, but just because he grants mercy doesn't mean he LOVES them. HUGE difference.


28 posted on 08/02/2005 6:52:36 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus; P-Marlowe
"When is the last time you saw a congregation sit in silent fear of the awesome power and holiness of God Almighty?"

Or how about kneeling in prayer? Most of them have removed the kneelers because they weren't cost effective.

29 posted on 08/02/2005 6:56:33 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas; P-Marlowe; xzins; Buggman; blue-duncan
This would make God a respector of persons, MacArthur! Just in a different way from how the Arminians make God a respector of persons.

God ONLY loves his elect.

rw, I don't see how the GRPLs can have God chosing between the Elect and Non-Elect without making him a respecter of persons.

30 posted on 08/02/2005 7:03:16 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
It is patently absurd that God would love everybody but then only love only a few enough to save them. This would make God a respector of persons, MacArthur! Just in a different way from how the Arminians make God a respector of persons.

How so? How is God a respector of persons in this case? To argue such you would have to show that God was compelled or moved to set His special, electing love upon some because of some condition of theirs. That God has some measure of love for the reprobate does not undermine God's sovereignty or will in unconditionally electing others to salvation.

God ONLY loves his elect. He grants mercy to the non-elect with his common grace, but just because he grants mercy doesn't mean he LOVES them. HUGE difference.

I don't find it quite so easy to completely exclude any aspect or concept of love from mercy.

31 posted on 08/02/2005 7:08:33 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
rw, I don't see how the GRPLs can have God chosing between the Elect and Non-Elect without making him a respecter of persons.

UNCONDITIONAL election, Corin. He chooses according to the good pleasure of His will, NOT according to some foreseen attribute of the individual.

32 posted on 08/02/2005 7:10:03 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; rwfromkansas
To argue such you would have to show that God was compelled or moved to set His special, electing love upon some because of some condition of theirs.

You said that better than I did.

33 posted on 08/02/2005 7:10:33 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu

But WHY some and not others Fru? What's the difference?


34 posted on 08/02/2005 7:12:21 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu

"God hates all workers of iniquity."

Love does not equal hate.

You make a good point about he respector of persons issue, but I still see a difference between just granting a measure of mercy in common grace and truly loving people enough to save them.


35 posted on 08/02/2005 7:13:52 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

God's good peasure.


36 posted on 08/02/2005 7:14:36 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas; Frumanchu; xzins; P-Marlowe; Buggman; blue-duncan; Revelation 911

WHY do some please Him and others do not?


37 posted on 08/02/2005 7:15:34 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

They don't until He chooses to save some.


38 posted on 08/02/2005 7:16:27 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
But WHY some and not others Fru? What's the difference?

I cannot give you the reasons beyond what Scripture says they are (and are not). It was according to the good pleasure of His will and not according to any condition foreseen in us.

39 posted on 08/02/2005 7:17:51 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

You're talking in circles, because my question is WHY does He choose some and not others?

What is the distinction between those chosen and those not chosen?


40 posted on 08/02/2005 7:18:34 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
WHY do some please Him and others do not?

Wrong question, Corin. The question is why does it please Him to elect whom He does and not others. To imply that the elect were chosen because they pleased Him is contrary both to the Reformed view and to Scripture.

41 posted on 08/02/2005 7:19:26 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

There is none except God chose to save some for whatever reason he chooses to his glory.

It is not based on anything in the people; that is all we know. We don't fully know why.

Unlike with Arminianism, Calvinism does have all people equal. We are all the same, and God simply chose to save some of those who were dead for his glory.


42 posted on 08/02/2005 7:21:16 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
You're talking in circles, because my question is WHY does He choose some and not others? What is the distinction between those chosen and those not chosen?

Scripture does not tell us why beyond the fact that it pleases Him to choose as He has, and that the choice was not made based on any condition we met.

43 posted on 08/02/2005 7:21:18 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
Wrong question, Corin.

Only because you can't answer it.

44 posted on 08/02/2005 7:21:49 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Calvinism does have all people equal.

And yet some are more equal than others...

45 posted on 08/02/2005 7:23:55 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands; rwfromkansas

You have the exact same problem with why some to choose to follow Christ and others don't from your perspective. Did God make some more intelligent or spiritually discerning than others? The argument you have for WHY someone chooses to follow our Lord Jesus either comes down to the working of the Spirit or the WORK of one's own choice.


46 posted on 08/02/2005 7:29:00 AM PDT by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD; rwfromkansas; Frumanchu
Actually Harley, it's your problem with our perspective.

Have a good day boys. I need to get back to work.

47 posted on 08/02/2005 7:32:04 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands (Join the Hobbit Hole Troop Support - http://freeper.the-hobbit-hole.net/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Only because you can't answer it.

Noooo...because you asked why some pleased Him more than others (the implication being that their pleasing Him led Him to choose them), and that is not what we're saying. I assumed you misspoke so I attempted to correct for clarity.

48 posted on 08/02/2005 7:37:46 AM PDT by Frumanchu (Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone to the glory of God alone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; Corin Stormhands

God chooses on the basis of faith in Christ.

The bible tells us that.

You two are again arguing over whether God regenerates due to irresistible grace before we believe or whether we believe due to prevenient grace and then are regenerated.

Answer that question and you win the prize.


49 posted on 08/02/2005 7:45:58 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands

*** And yet some are more equal than others...***

Ok you. Stop with the barnyard jokes!

;)


50 posted on 08/02/2005 7:51:56 AM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 951-971 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson