Sorry for the delay in replying; I've been away.
Agreed.
The reason for bringing it up is because I do not believe God would send his Son to die for people whom he hated - just another indication that God loves everyone, as I believe Scripture teaches.
No, but I can tell you how English has changed. And I can repeat what I read somewhere; that, for the Hebrews, if God chose someone that proved he favoured and therefore loved them, whereas if he didn't choose them it was because he disapproved of and hated them. Which is what is going on in the verse about Jacob and Esau, which others here have confirmed.
I'm defining darkness as Scripture does; the opposite of light.
Light is about being open, honest, free from sin, so that we, and others, can see the right path. Jesus said that we are light for the world. He said that he is THE light for the world but that people did not come to him because they preferred the darkness. Darkness, in Scripture, is associated with sin, negative, destructive emotions and behaviour, ignorance, unbelief, and practices such as witchcraft. Paul urged us to be blameless so that we will shine like stars in the sky in a corrupt and dark generation, Philippians 2:14-15.
My particular example isn't Scriptural - but neither is the teaching that God who created everyone will only selectively love a few of them; that's the point.
God created humans in his image; that is Scriptural, Genesis 1:26-27, and created and saw us in the womb, Psalm 139:13.
God is a perfect, loving heavenly Father; that is Scriptural, Matthew 7:9-11. I believe you can apply these verses in the way that I did just then - no earthly father would create a child, provide for it but refuse to love it and disinherit it. If we heard of anyone behaving in this way I'm pretty sure they would be reported for child cruelty. It's certainly not love, not by any stretch of the imagination. So if we don't expect, and wouldn't tolerate, human fathers who behaved like this, why do some say that this is how God behaves? That God created everyone, but made some people especially and specifically for hell because he had decided to hate them?
And you are ignoring the 3 or 4 people who have explained what this means. Why? Don't you like the explanation?
It seems entirely reasonable to conclude that Judas was not expecting the resurrection. None of the disciples were, that's why they didn't believe the women who told them about the empty tomb, their words seemed "like nonsense."
When Peter, James and John came down from the Mount of transfiguration, they were told not to say anything until Jesus had risen from the dead; they then debated what "rising from the dead" meant. Mark 16:9-20 tells us that Jesus rebuked the disciples for their unbelief - he also told the couple on the road to Emmaus that they were slow to believe the Scriptures that told of his rising from the dead.
It is also logical to conclude that if Judas wouldn't have killed himself if he had known for a fact that Jesus was going to be raised from the dead. Yes, he betrayed Jesus and Jesus died in agony; but if he rose and was alive again, what would be the problem? Remorse for making someone suffer, maybe - but as Jesus was alive again then it wasn't the end and Judas would have had an opportunity to ask for forgiveness, or explain himself and why he did it.
It is reasonable to draw these conclusions from what we read in Scripture.
But because I wasn't there, and could not have seen inside Judas' head even if I had been, I don't know for certain. I can't prove that Judas didn't think "I want an excuse to kill myself. I know, I'll betray Jesus; that will give me the excuse I need and make my death sound almost acceptable."
I don't have any difficulty with God knowing everything.
God knew that Adam would sin, yet still gave him a choice. God knows that some people will end up in hell; he doesn't want them to, doesn't want them to reject and live without him, and that is not why he made them - but he knows they will, and allows them to do so, (even while giving them many opportunities to come to faith.)
What has that got to do with the fact that God doesn't hate?
Agreed. God IS love - and does not hate.
The reason I asked why you believe what God is like is because Scripture says that God is perfect, pure, holy, love, light and many other things as well. God is perfect, God IS love, God created everyone and sent Jesus to die for everyone. If you believe that God can hate his own creation, and sometimes does, then love and hatred both exist in God. So how can he be perfect, or even good? How can he be light if darkness exists in him?
So what does that mean - that he is only love some of the time; that he only loves those he knows will love him; that he has a dual personality; what? And what we believe about God impacts everything else too. Jesus was, and is, God, but how could he be perfect if the Father who sent him was not perfect? And if he wasn't perfect, how could he take our sins upon himself? And if he didn't take our sins upon himself, but was in fact dying for his own, then how can we be saved?
So asking what you believe about God is entirely reasonable in light of the things you have posted.
I beg to disagree with on several points. I believe that God is omniscient. However, and this is an important qualifiers, I also believe that God knows the future for what it is, as it is in its own nature, namely open-ended and indeterminate, the realm of possibilities, not definite matters of fact. I believe we all have free will. That means we have to decide for ourselves. God cannot decide for us, God cannot decide our decisions for us. So the future is open-ended until we decide.
Also, you have spoken of God punishing people. I that that far too often Christians have presented God is a wholly negative light as the Ruling Caesar, Unmoved Mover, and Ruthless Moralist, all rolled into one. I believe that God is loving; and when you love others, you do not seek to coerce them by threats of terrible punishments. So I don't see Hell as an option, not at all.
Also, I hear you saying that God is vengeful and therefore anted someone to pay for pour sins. Consequently, he had Jesus step in, an innocent party, and take the rap. I find that contradictory. If God is truly loving, then god is truly forgiving, and forgiveness, at a minimum, means remission of punishment, not that you take it out on someone else. Furthermore, I don't see any justice served here. I don't think anyone can take the rap for someone else's wrong doings. Fortunately, there are other theories of the atonement, other than this penal-substitutionary one.
Upvote
0