intelligent christians?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 17478
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 33 times
Contact:

Re: intelligent christians?

Post #31

Post by otseng »

Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
What a hypocrite you are.
Moderator Comment

Please do not make any comments of a personal nature.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

User avatar
PinSeeker
Guru
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: intelligent christians?

Post #32

Post by PinSeeker »

Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Who made you the police? Herein lies the problem.
<eyeroll>
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Who says dictatorial rule is evil? You.
Not, not merely me; as I said, Only a dictatorship is by definition evil -- because it takes away the rights and even person-hood of its citizens/subjects.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Do you think the world knows what is evil and good?
This is really a non sequitur, but yes, because each human being is made in the image of God, and part of what that means is that (although they may dwell in denial at least from time to time because of sin, they do know, innately, what they should and shouldn't do. Yes.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
What a hypocrite you are.
<eyeroll>
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
You say sovereignty and dictatorial form of government cannot be compared.
Well yes, because they're two different things. Wow.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Yet you want to say love proves God is not dictatorial.
Sure. A dictatorship does not allow for love, and a dictator has total disregard for love for anyone but himself. Not because I say so, but by definition.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Being guilty of crimes and deserving of punishment is not the point.
It is the point. You may not want it to be, but that matters not.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
The point is, God is not just a God of love. He is a God of vengeance, and of hate, as is proved in the Scriptures I gave.
And as I said, God's vengeance and hate -- both holy, as opposed to the sinful expression of those two things by human beings -- are expressions of His love.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Do you agree that God can hate and be vengeful?
Yes, but as I just said, God's hate and vengeance are not sinful, but righteous and holy. And they are expressions of His love. Just because those to whom it may be directed don't like it does not make that not so.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
And, no, the opposite of love is hate.
Nope. Indifference. Not caring.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Funny how you have to make to up your own definitions to fit your lack of knowledge of God.
<eyeroll>
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
No, God doesn't love those who He sends to Hell or the Lake of Fire. If He did, He wouldn't send them there. Esau is there. And God hated Esau.
God loves all His creation; He made it -- and everyone in it -- for His own glory. God may even place judgments on believers from time to time. This is not because He hates them, of course, but disciplines, and as we know -- or should anyway -- God disciplines those whom He loves.

Romans 9 is all about God's sovereign choice of His Elect to salvation. When we read in Romans 9 that God hated loved Jacob but hated Esau, it should not be understood that God actually hates Esau, but that He did not choose Esau in the same sovereign, distinguishing way as He did Jacob.

Satan -- Satan is a fallen angel, as we see in Ezekiel, and therefore not part of God's creation. But yes, I would say God loves Satan in the same way as Esau and all unbelievers, really. He's finally cast into Hell ahead of all unbelievers as their de-facto leader, so to speak.

Hell is the final, irrevocable Judgment God places upon those who reject Him. But He does so in love. Those on the receiving end of this final judgment are not happy about it by any stretch of the imagination. But that has nothing to do with God's intents or His purposes... or His love.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
No, the Bible does not say God is only love. That is what you are saying.
Yes it does, that's what the Bible says. And I only say it because the Bible does.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
God is hate and vengeful also, as the Scripture says.
Nope. He hates, and He will ultimately take vengeance on unbelievers, but again, both are in holiness, righteousness, and love.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
...you are adamant that I am declaring God is evil by what I am saying.
All I've said is that, in declaring that God is a dictator, you inadvertently attribute evil to God.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Yet you don't say how or why I am mistaken. Why? Because I am not.
Well, I do, for sure, explain why (over and over), but you just refute it. That's okay with me, but it just is what it is. Nobody who's mistaken actually thinks they're mistaken. :)
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
So what? The whole Bible is very old. Written many years ago. That doesn't mean prophecy has all been fulfilled. What kind of argument is that? A foolish one.
I would say so, too, Quantrill. That's not what I'm saying at all. But the same can be said of the argument that all prophecies -- even those of John's vision in Revelation, which is what we were talking about here -- are wholly future. It's a foolish, comprehension-poor, assertion/claim.
Quantrill wrote:
Sat Jun 27, 2020 7:20 pm
Why is the Dispensational take on 'reality' wooden?
That's not what I ever said, Quantrill. You're putting words in my mouth, which is -- inadvertent as it may be -- not cool.

Grace and peace to you.

Quantrill
Apprentice
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 7:41 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: intelligent christians?

Post #33

Post by Quantrill »

PinSeeker wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:53 pm

Not, not merely me; as I said, Only a dictatorship is by definition evil -- because it takes away the rights and even person-hood of its citizens/subjects.

This is really a non sequitur, but yes, because each human being is made in the image of God, and part of what that means is that (although they may dwell in denial at least from time to time because of sin, they do know, innately, what they should and shouldn't do. Yes.

Well yes, because they're two different things. Wow.

Sure. A dictatorship does not allow for love, and a dictator has total disregard for love for anyone but himself. Not because I say so, but by definition.

It is the point. You may not want it to be, but that matters not.

And as I said, God's vengeance and hate -- both holy, as opposed to the sinful expression of those two things by human beings -- are expressions of His love.


Yes, but as I just said, God's hate and vengeance are not sinful, but righteous and holy. And they are expressions of His love. Just because those to whom it may be directed don't like it does not make that not so.


Nope. Indifference. Not caring.



God loves all His creation; He made it -- and everyone in it -- for His own glory. God may even place judgments on believers from time to time. This is not because He hates them, of course, but disciplines, and as we know -- or should anyway -- God disciplines those whom He loves.

Romans 9 is all about God's sovereign choice of His Elect to salvation. When we read in Romans 9 that God hated loved Jacob but hated Esau, it should not be understood that God actually hates Esau, but that He did not choose Esau in the same sovereign, distinguishing way as He did Jacob.

Satan -- Satan is a fallen angel, as we see in Ezekiel, and therefore not part of God's creation. But yes, I would say God loves Satan in the same way as Esau and all unbelievers, really. He's finally cast into Hell ahead of all unbelievers as their de-facto leader, so to speak.

Hell is the final, irrevocable Judgment God places upon those who reject Him. But He does so in love. Those on the receiving end of this final judgment are not happy about it by any stretch of the imagination. But that has nothing to do with God's intents or His purposes... or His love.

Yes it does, that's what the Bible says. And I only say it because the Bible does.

Nope. He hates, and He will ultimately take vengeance on unbelievers, but again, both are in holiness, righteousness, and love.

All I've said is that, in declaring that God is a dictator, you inadvertently attribute evil to God.

Well, I do, for sure, explain why (over and over), but you just refute it. That's okay with me, but it just is what it is. Nobody who's mistaken actually thinks they're mistaken. :)

I would say so, too, Quantrill. That's not what I'm saying at all. But the same can be said of the argument that all prophecies -- even those of John's vision in Revelation, which is what we were talking about here -- are wholly future. It's a foolish, comprehension-poor, assertion/claim.

That's not what I ever said, Quantrill. You're putting words in my mouth, which is -- inadvertent as it may be -- not cool.

Grace and peace to you.
Why do you base your definition of 'dictator' on the world's terms?

What rights will the people of God have in the Kingdom? Do you think God will rule through a Democratic or Republican Representative form of government? Explain the form of government by which God will rule. And don't say love, which is your go to answer for everything. I am asking the form of government.

The world doesn't know good from evil. That is the problem. They may know right from wrong, or the worlds good and evil, but the two are not the same. What defines evil and good is who is behind it. God or satan. Nebuchadnezzar was dictator, but that was good. Why? Because God was behind it.

Where does it say God loves everyone? Where does it say in the Bible that God is only love? And when in the Bible it says God hates, why doesn't it mean God hates?

You stated in post #(25) concerning the book of (Revelation) that the Dispensational view was future and wooden reality. Why is reality wooden?

Quantrill

User avatar
PinSeeker
Guru
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: intelligent christians?

Post #34

Post by PinSeeker »

Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:06 am
Why do you base your definition of 'dictator' on the world's terms?
Oh my goodness. Okay, letting this go...
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:06 am
Where does it say God loves everyone?
In Genesis 1, we see that God made all of creation "very good." So God loves all of His creation in the general sense. So we must have a little more understanding about what it means for God to hate various things, including unbelievers, Esau being one of them and the representative for all of them in Romans 9. God cannot be in the presence of sin. So 'hate' doesn't mean 'not love,' but rather 'love' in a different way than those who are not members of His Elect. This is what Romans 9 is saying. What might make it a little clearer for you is the following example:

As a father, I love both my children in a distinguishing way, much differently then I love other children and other people in general. And really, in comparison to my children, I hate them -- I do not care for them in the same way as I do my own children. But this does not mean I do not care about other children, and I will even care for them so far as it is my responsibility to do so, and in that sense I love them. Do you get it? Maybe not, but you should.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:06 am
Where does it say in the Bible that God is only love?
God is love, as we read in 1 John 4:8. Nowhere does it say anything about God being anything other than love.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:06 am
And when in the Bible it says God hates, why doesn't it mean God hates?
It does mean God hates, of course, but 'hate' and 'not love' are not synonyms or the same in concept. 'Hate' and 'love' are not opposites, as I said. See above.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:06 am
You stated in post #(25) concerning the book of (Revelation) that the Dispensational view was future and wooden reality. Why is reality wooden?
I believe I've said multiple times, Quantrill, that I have never said "reality is wooden." It would be a bit idiotic to say something like that, wouldn't it? And a statement like that wouldn't even make sense, to be quite honest, right? So quit asking me why I said that, because I didn't. Here's the short version of the answer to your first question here:
  • The book of Revelation is about John's dream concerning the history of the world from shortly after he wrote Revelation to the return of Jesus Christ. It is not still future only.
  • Everything symbolized metaphorically throughout Revelation does not merely have a one-to-one correlation with something, but rather a one-to-many correlation throughout history, now past, present, and future. Except for the return of Christ, of course.
  • Everything in Revelation is not strictly chronologically sequential, but rather a retelling of history several times... seven to be exact... each time culminating with the return of Christ.
The dispensational take on Revelation rejects all three of these statements, and in that sense, is a wooden -- undiscerning, stridently literal -- take on John's revelation of the end times. Maybe you understand a little better what I'm saying now.

Grace and peace to you.

Quantrill
Apprentice
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 7:41 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: intelligent christians?

Post #35

Post by Quantrill »

PinSeeker wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:25 pm

Oh my goodness. Okay, letting this go...

In Genesis 1, we see that God made all of creation "very good." So God loves all of His creation in the general sense. So we must have a little more understanding about what it means for God to hate various things, including unbelievers, Esau being one of them and the representative for all of them in Romans 9. God cannot be in the presence of sin. So 'hate' doesn't mean 'not love,' but rather 'love' in a different way than those who are not members of His Elect. This is what Romans 9 is saying. What might make it a little clearer for you is the following example:

As a father, I love both my children in a distinguishing way, much differently then I love other children and other people in general. And really, in comparison to my children, I hate them -- I do not care for them in the same way as I do my own children. But this does not mean I do not care about other children, and I will even care for them so far as it is my responsibility to do so, and in that sense I love them. Do you get it? Maybe not, but you should.

God is love, as we read in 1 John 4:8. Nowhere does it say anything about God being anything other than love.

It does mean God hates, of course, but 'hate' and 'not love' are not synonyms or the same in concept. 'Hate' and 'love' are not opposites, as I said. See above.

I believe I've said multiple times, Quantrill, that I have never said "reality is wooden." It would be a bit idiotic to say something like that, wouldn't it? And a statement like that wouldn't even make sense, to be quite honest, right? So quit asking me why I said that, because I didn't. Here's the short version of the answer to your first question here:
  • The book of Revelation is about John's dream concerning the history of the world from shortly after he wrote Revelation to the return of Jesus Christ. It is not still future only.
  • Everything symbolized metaphorically throughout Revelation does not merely have a one-to-one correlation with something, but rather a one-to-many correlation throughout history, now past, present, and future. Except for the return of Christ, of course.
  • Everything in Revelation is not strictly chronologically sequential, but rather a retelling of history several times... seven to be exact... each time culminating with the return of Christ.
The dispensational take on Revelation rejects all three of these statements, and in that sense, is a wooden -- undiscerning, stridently literal -- take on John's revelation of the end times. Maybe you understand a little better what I'm saying now.

Grace and peace to you.
Oh my goodness...why do you let it go? Again, why do you base your definition of 'dictator' on the worlds definition?

Why do you ignore my questions concerning 'dictator'? What form of government will Jesus Christ rule under? Democratic? Republican Representative? Dictator? And, as I said, don't say love. I am asking the form of government God will rule over.

What 'rights' will the people have in the Kingdom? Does God issue to man a 'bill of rights'?

Nice speech, yet you didn't answer my question. Where in Scripture does it say God loves everyone?

In other words, you have no Scripture that says God is only love. Does God have other attributes? Yes indeed. He hates. He is vengeful, as Scripture declares. So, when Scripture says something, you disagree. When you have no Scripture you just continue with your own view of God. No need of Scripture.

Well, if God hates, as Scripture says, then God hated Esau, as Scripture says. But then you want to say God does not really hate Esau. If love is involved, you take it literally. If hate is involved, you explain it away. You simply are making a god in your image.

Your post #(25) says differently. If you want to admit you are in error, that is no problem. But don't say you didn't say it. Why do you see reality as wooden?

As to the book of (Revelation), yes Dispensationalism disagrees with you. So? You have not provided any reason for me a Dispensationalist to agree with you. Why is the book or (Revelation) not to be taken literally?

Quantrill

User avatar
PinSeeker
Guru
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

uantrill:

Post #36

Post by PinSeeker »

no text
Last edited by PinSeeker on Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PinSeeker
Guru
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

uantrill:

Post #37

Post by PinSeeker »

Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
...why do you let it go? Why do you ignore my questions concerning 'dictator'?
Because you're changing the English language (the definition of 'dictator') to suit yourself. As if you have the authority do that, anyway, which is ridiculous. Any rational person would say, "Okay, think what you want, dude," and at least eventually walk away.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
...you have no Scripture that says God is only love.
1 John 4:8 is very clear; the exact wording is, "God is love."
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
Does God have other attributes? Yes indeed.
Of course He does, but every attribute He has is under the umbrella of -- in the context of -- love, which is what He is; God is love (1 John 4:8).
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
So, when Scripture says something, you disagree. When you have no Scripture you just continue with your own view of God. No need of Scripture.
LOL! I'm not the one in this conversation trying to change the meaning of words. I'm the one directly quoting Scripture, and you're the one refuting it. My goodness.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
Well, if God hates, as Scripture says, then God hated Esau, as Scripture says.
Absolutely.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
But then you want to say God does not really hate Esau.
No, I said -- and I say again -- that God hating Esau (and thus all unbelievers) does not mean God doesn't love Esau (and all unbelievers) at all, but not in an electing way as He does Jacob (and all believers) -- similar, albeit much higher, to the love a father has for his own children and not for other children that are not his own. Love has to do intensely with desire, and as I said, God does not desire that any should perish but that all should come to repentance and belief -- the Bible is crystal clear on this. And again, love as described in the Bible is an action, not an emotion.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
If love is involved, you take it literally. If hate is involved, you explain it away.
If your definition of hate were correct, you would retract that statement without hesitation.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
You simply are making a god in your image.
LOL! Wow.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
Your post #(25) says differently. If you want to admit you are in error, that is no problem. But don't say you didn't say it. Why do you see reality as wooden?
I will say (again) that I didn't say it, Quantrill, because I didn't say it. Here's exactly what I said in post 25, Quantrill:
  • "Revelation is literature of the apocalyptic genre, Quantrill, and John's sharing of his dream. Therefore, it is not a future-only, wooden reality (as dispensational Christians see it) but a symbolic and figurative picture of the reality we see around us now and will continue to see up to the return of Christ."
These were my exact words. There is absolutely nothing there saying I "see reality as wooden." Nothing. Either you are misunderstanding what I said (which would be quite astonishing), or you are misrepresenting what I actually said (which would be twisting what I said on purpose to make it something it is obviously not) to suit your own narrative.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
As to the book of (Revelation), yes Dispensationalism disagrees with you.
Yes, and this would make them wrong. Not necessarily because they disagree with me, per se, but because they don't rightly understand God.
Quantrill wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:50 pm
Why is the book or (Revelation) not to be taken literally?
I never said this. I have only ever said that the understanding of dispensationalists regarding what the literal nature of Revelation really is, is terribly wrong.

Grace and peace to you, Quantrill

Quantrill
Apprentice
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 7:41 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: uantrill:

Post #38

Post by Quantrill »

PinSeeker wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 9:58 am

Because you're changing the English language (the definition of 'dictator') to suit yourself. As if you have the authority do that, anyway, which is ridiculous. Any rational person would say, "Okay, think what you want, dude," and at least eventually walk away.

1 John 4:8 is very clear; the exact wording is, "God is love."

Of course He does, but every attribute He has is under the umbrella of -- in the context of -- love, which is what He is; God is love (1 John 4:8).

LOL! I'm not the one in this conversation trying to change the meaning of words. I'm the one directly quoting Scripture, and you're the one refuting it. My goodness.


Absolutely.

No, I said -- and I say again -- that God hating Esau (and thus all unbelievers) does not mean God doesn't love Esau (and all unbelievers) at all, but not in an electing way as He does Jacob (and all believers) -- similar, albeit much higher, to the love a father has for his own children and not for other children that are not his own. Love has to do intensely with desire, and as I said, God does not desire that any should perish but that all should come to repentance and belief -- the Bible is crystal clear on this. And again, love as described in the Bible is an action, not an emotion.

If your definition of hate were correct, you would retract that statement without hesitation.

LOL! Wow.

I will say (again) that I didn't say it, Quantrill, because I didn't say it. Here's exactly what I said in post 25, Quantrill:
  • "Revelation is literature of the apocalyptic genre, Quantrill, and John's sharing of his dream. Therefore, it is not a future-only, wooden reality (as dispensational Christians see it) but a symbolic and figurative picture of the reality we see around us now and will continue to see up to the return of Christ."
These were my exact words. There is absolutely nothing there saying I "see reality as wooden." Nothing. Either you are misunderstanding what I said (which would be quite astonishing), or you are misrepresenting what I actually said (which would be twisting what I said on purpose to make it something it is obviously not) to suit your own narrative.

Yes, and this would make them wrong. Not necessarily because they disagree with me, per se, but because they don't rightly understand God.

I never said this. I have only ever said that the understanding of dispensationalists regarding what the literal nature of Revelation really is, is terribly wrong.

Grace and peace to you, Quantrill
Again, what form of government will God and Jesus Christ rule over ? Democratic? Representative Republican, Dictatorship, etc. etc. etc. What form? And don't say love, as love is not a form of government. This question is not going away.

(1 John 4:8) does not say God is 'only love'. That was my question. You have no answer as you have no verse.

Well, if God is love, which He is, and every attribute is under that umbrella, which you say it is, then what is the problem with God being a dictator? That is what I am saying. God is Dictator, but that is good. You say God can hate, because He is a God of love. Well, God can be a Dictator also, because He is a God of love.

Actually you are changing the meaning of words. You are defining God's rule which will be dictatorial, as evil. And that is based upon mans experience in history with dictators. And you haven't showed any Scripture that proves God is not and will not be Dictator. Your example of 'God is love' is immaterial. God can be love and still be sole authority and dictator.

Ok, we agree God hated Esau. But then you contradict yourself and say that doesn't mean God didn't love Esau. What an oxymoronic statement. God hated Esau. And He hated him before he was even born. (Rom. 9:11) He never loved Esau. Scripture is clear. Now what?

I stand by my statement and you have nothing to disprove it. If love is involved you take it literally. If hate is involved, you attempt to explain it away. You are making a god in your image. You bet...wow.

You said it, not me. 'Wooden reallity'. Explain why this 'reality', irregardless of who you are accusing, is 'wooden'? In opposition to this 'wooden reality' you present your 'symbolic and figurative reality' that surrounds us. So, reality is wooden and symbols and figures are the real 'reality'?

Whether Dispensationalism is wrong or not, has certainly not been proved by anyone I have ever talked to. And I don't see anything you have to offer that is going to change it. But humor me. Why is Dispensatinalism wrong and you are right. And don't tell me because God is love. And don't tell me because you are right. Tell me where Dispensationalism is in error in the Scriptures.

Then you agree that the book of (Revelation) is to be interpreted literally?

Quantrill

User avatar
PinSeeker
Guru
Posts: 1951
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: uantrill:

Post #39

Post by PinSeeker »

Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
Again, what form of government will God and Jesus Christ rule over ? Democratic? Representative Republican, Dictatorship, etc. etc. etc. What form? And don't say love, as love is not a form of government. This question is not going away.
None of the above. The government will be of God -- in the person of Jesus Christ -- and thus perfectly holy, which I think you would agree with. We will be co-heirs with Christ. It will be more similar to a Monarchy than anything else. God is King of kings, and that will not change.
Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
(1 John 4:8) does not say God is 'only love'. That was my question. You have no answer as you have no verse.
If God -- or anyone -- is one thing, they are by any modicum of logic, not something or anything else. Having said that:
  • "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." [1 John 4:8, English Standard Version]
  • "The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, North American Standard Bible]
  • "He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." [1 John 4:8, King James Version]
  • "He who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, New King James Version]
  • "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." [1 John 4:8, New International Version]
  • "But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, New Living Translation]
God does a whole lot of things. He has many attributes. His character involves many different traits. But He IS love and only love -- which manifests in many different ways (including hate) -- and therefore not not anything else. But hey, you're your own person; believe what you want, man.
Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
Actually you are changing the meaning of words.
No, you are. You're just digging the hole you're in deeper and deeper. We're finished here, Quantrill.
Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
Ok, we agree God hated Esau. But then you contradict yourself and say that doesn't mean God didn't love Esau. What an oxymoronic statement. God hated Esau. And He hated him before he was even born. (Rom. 9:11) He never loved Esau. Scripture is clear. Now what?
...and deeper and deeper...
Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
You said it, not me. 'Wooden reallity'.
No, I never said that in any shape, form, or fashion.
Quantrill wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:29 pm
Then you agree that the book of (Revelation) is to be interpreted literally?
As I have said at least three or four times now, Quantrill, yes. But not in the woodenly literal sense that dispensationalists would have it.

We're done here, Quantrill. At least I am, anyway. Have a nice day. Grace and peace to you.

Quantrill
Apprentice
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 7:41 pm
Location: Texas
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: uantrill:

Post #40

Post by Quantrill »

PinSeeker wrote:
Wed Jul 01, 2020 4:33 pm

None of the above. The government will be of God -- in the person of Jesus Christ -- and thus perfectly holy, which I think you would agree with. We will be co-heirs with Christ. It will be more similar to a Monarchy than anything else. God is King of kings, and that will not change.

If God -- or anyone -- is one thing, they are by any modicum of logic, not something or anything else. Having said that:
  • "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love." [1 John 4:8, English Standard Version]
  • "The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, North American Standard Bible]
  • "He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." [1 John 4:8, King James Version]
  • "He who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, New King James Version]
  • "Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." [1 John 4:8, New International Version]
  • "But anyone who does not love does not know God, for God is love." [1 John 4:8, New Living Translation]
God does a whole lot of things. He has many attributes. His character involves many different traits. But He IS love and only love -- which manifests in many different ways (including hate) -- and therefore not not anything else. But hey, you're your own person; believe what you want, man.

No, you are. You're just digging the hole you're in deeper and deeper. We're finished here, Quantrill.

...and deeper and deeper...

No, I never said that in any shape, form, or fashion.

As I have said at least three or four times now, Quantrill, yes. But not in the woodenly literal sense that dispensationalists would have it.

We're done here, Quantrill. At least I am, anyway. Have a nice day. Grace and peace to you.
Of course the government will be of God and in the Person of Jesus Christ. That is not the point. What form of government will God rule over? You say none of the above. You say a form of 'monarchy'. That's nice. Jesus is the King. Does He allow any will other than His own to be executed? Does Jesus allow any other will other than the Fathers to be executed? As you rule with Him, are you going to offer an opinion to Him that is contrary to His or the Fathers will? If you did, would He consider your opinion of value even though it was opposed to the Fathers will and His? Of course not. That makes Him an Absolute Monarchy. A dictator. Which is as I said, good. Because He rules in righteousness.

You have provided nothing to show that God is 'only love'. That He is love, I am not denying. But that is not all He is. Which you are denying. You use 'love' to make God into something He is not. You use 'love' to make your own god.

No, it is you who are changing the definitions. First you identify 'dictator' as evil, and there is no definition of 'dictator' as evil other than through human experience. But again, every form of government in human experience is evil. How about your 'monarchy'? What makes that Holy and Good? You see? Probably not. It is not the form of government, but the One ruling that makes the government Good and Holy.

How about David? Was David a dictator? He answered to no man. But he did answer to God. Was Davids rule evil?

Then there is your definition of hate, which is not hate. You don't want to make hate the opposite of love because Scripture is clear that God hates. So you come up with another definition. That's handy. See, you have no answer. God hated Esau before he was even born. And so He hated him all his life. May be Esau did some 'good things' at times. May be he even made a show of being religious at times. But guess what? God hated him.

Yes, you did in post #(25). You even quoted it yourself. 'wooden reality'. You say (Revelation) is to be interpreted literally but not in the 'wooden literal sense' that Dispensationalists do. Explain if you can.

What does that mean...'we are done here'. I am not done. Are you?

Quantrill

Post Reply