For those who argue for the omnibenevolence of God…

[John Mullally]

There are also cosmic elements to Paul's soteriology that classical Protestant soteriology often overlooked. Christ did not just die for the elect, or even humanity, but to redeem the cosmos.

This if off track and I am not very interested in UFOs. Scripture shows that Christ died once and will not give his life again (as Moses was judged for striking the rock twice (Number 20:7-11). The fact that Christ died to save humanity is an argument that there are not as of yet other intelligent life on other planets that God choose to redeem. Those with that thinking attribute UFO sightings to evil spirits as Satan is termed the prince of the power of the air in Ephesians 2:2.

 

[FireDragon76]

This if off track and I am not very interested in UFOs. Scripture shows that Christ died once and will not give his life again (as Moses was judged for striking the rock twice (Number 20:7-11). The fact that Christ died to save humanity is an argument that there are not as of yet other intelligent life on other planets that God choose to redeem. Those with that thinking attribute UFO sightings to evil spirits as Satan is termed the prince of the power of the air in Ephesians 2:2.

Who said anything about UFO's? I'm talking about the redemption of creation, not necessarily extraterrestrial in flying saucers.

If you are familiar with N.T. Wright, he has written about this theme in the New Testament, specifically Paul, but it's a common theme in other forms of Christianity, especially Eastern Orthodoxy, but also some modernist theologians.

 

[Hammster]

How is that reconciled with omnibenevolence? It seems to me, it cannot be.

It’s not. That’s the whole point. Israel wasn’t special. They weren’t better people (see Judges, for example). Yet God chose to covenant with them over other nations. He choses to love His people. He gave His sheep to His Son to care fore, feed, protect, and die for. That is a reality. Jesus wasn’t given the goats.

 

[Hammster]

Some passages say Christ died for His own, His sheep, His church, but no passage says He died only for these. His death can be provided for all people while only those who believe are actually saved by His death. His death for His own, then, is part of the larger whole in which He died also for the world.

1 Timothy 4:10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.​

Do you understand what a savior does?

 

[Hammster]

There are also cosmic elements to Paul's soteriology that classical Protestant soteriology often overlooked. Christ did not just die for the elect, or even humanity, but to redeem the cosmos.

That would depend on how that word is used. Yes, this is the new heavens and new earth, and He’s making all things new. But we may be drifting outside the purpose of this thread.

 

[John Mullally]

Some passages say Christ died for His own, His sheep, His church, but no passage says He died only for these. His death can be provided for all people while only those who believe are actually saved by His death. His death for His own, then, is part of the larger whole in which He died also for the world.

1 Timothy 4:10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.​

Do you understand what a savior does?

Of course I understand what a savior does. Are you trying to understand what I am writing? As I explained in Post 254 on this thread, Christ's atonement for man's sin (and the resulting salvation) is received conditionally.

1 Timothy 2:4 says that God wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. In accordance, John 3:14-15 shows Christ provided atonement for sin, but that atonement is received conditionally through faith.

Since Jesus took upon Himself the “sin of the world,” (John 1:29), His atonement is therefore available to all, though is only applied whenever people place their faith in Him, just like His illustration at John 3:14-15 of Numbers 21:6-9 shows. Before a person looked upon the serpent on a standard, was anyone healed? Before a person believes in Jesus, is anyone saved? God Himself established the condition.

John 3:14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.​

Numbers 21:6 Then the Lord sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, “We sinned when we spoke against the Lord and against you. Pray that the Lord will take the snakes away from us.” So Moses prayed for the people. 8 The Lord said to Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live.” 9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, they lived.​

 

[Fervent]

I never once stated that God was unjust. You said God loved everyone the same. That whole chapter proves otherwise.

You're arguing that God is partial, which is unjust. So while you may not have said as much, that's precisely what you are arguing.

 

[Hammster]

Of course I understand what a savior does. Are you trying to understand what I am writing? As I explained in Post 254 on this thread, Christ's atonement for man's sin (and the resulting salvation) is received conditionally.

The condition being one of His sheep. That’s who hears His voice and follows Him.

 

[John Mullally]

The condition being one of His sheep. That’s who hears His voice and follows Him.

It helps to explain your position clearly, like how does one become a sheep? As I am sure we disagree as to whether people are born sheep or become a sheep. After making your position clear, it would help if you supported your position from scripture.

My sheep” is an idiomatic metaphor used in the first century to indicate “one who follows me.” Sheep were followers. Anyone can become Christ's sheep by following him. In John 10, Jesus didn't tell his opponents anything like “You do not believe because you weren’t elected from before the foundation of the world.”,

Shortly after Jesus confronts the Jewish leaders who opposed him saying they are not his sheep (John 10:24-28), Jesus tells them to consider his miracles so that they can become one of his sheep. People who don't believe in Jesus can become one of his sheep (i.e. followers)- their predicament is not fixed and unchangeable.

John 10:37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.​

 

[Hammster]

It helps to explain your position clearly, like how does one become a sheep? As I am sure we disagree as to whether people are born sheep or become a sheep. After making your position clear, it would help if you supported your position from scripture.

You are born a sheep.

My sheep” is an idiomatic metaphor used in the first century to indicate “one who follows me.” Sheep were followers. Anyone can become Christ's sheep by following him.

No, that’s the opposite of what He says. Following is indicative of being a sheep.

In John 10, Jesus didn't tell his opponents anything like “You do not believe because you weren’t elected from before the foundation of the world.”,

Sure He did.

But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.
— John 10:26

The cause of their disbelief was not being His sheep.

Shortly after Jesus confronts the Jewish leaders who opposed him saying they are not his sheep (John 10:24-28), Jesus tells them to consider his miracles so that they can become one of his sheep.

He never said anything like that.

People who don't believe in Jesus can become one of his sheep (i.e. followers)- their predicament is not fixed and unchangeable.

John 10:37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.​

Believing in works isn’t what saves anyone.

 

[bling]

If God loved everyone, He would protect everyone, regardless of how they responded to Him. That’s true love. Your version only had Him protecting those who please Him.

The problem is not with God's Love, but with humans humbly accepting that Love as pure undeserved charity in the form of forgiveness. Humans cannot obtain an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love) unless they humbly accept God's forgiveness (Luke 7 and Matt. 18). If they do not want God's Love they would not be happy in heaven where this agape is the only Love.

 

[bling]

What are you talking about? That has nothing to do with that verse, or my post.

You quoted:
For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.
— Deuteronomy 7:6
Jer. 18 explains why some Jews at some time, might not be blessed, because it is contingent on the Jews.

 

[John Mullally]

My sheep” is an idiomatic metaphor used in the first century to indicate “one who follows me.” Sheep were followers. Anyone can become Christ's sheep by following him.

No, that’s the opposite of what He says. Following is indicative of being a sheep.

If you replace every instance of sheep with follower in John 10, its easy to see that scripture supports my position.

In John 10, Jesus didn't tell his opponents anything like “You do not believe because you weren’t elected from before the foundation of the world.”,

Sure He did.

But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep.
— John 10:26

The cause of their disbelief was not being His sheep.

If that is the case it makes no sense for Jesus to give those he denounces as "not my sheep" (John 10:24-28) any reasons to believe in him as he did in John 10:37-38. That would be casting pearls before swine.

John 10 says nothing about being "elected from before the foundation of the world", but that is what you and many Calvinists believe Jesus meant by sheep. If that is the case why didn't Jesus clearly reference a Calvinist style election. Or why didn't he use a better term to describe those"elected from before the foundation of the world" like "his beloved", "his people", or "the elect".

When I look up the definition of sheep, I don't see anything about being favored by God in some way. instead, for example, in the Oxford dictionary I see "a person who is too easily influenced or led" included.

 

[Hammster]

The problem is not with God's Love, but with humans humbly accepting that Love as pure undeserved charity in the form of forgiveness. Humans cannot obtain an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love) unless they humbly accept God's forgiveness (Luke 7 and Matt. 18). If they do not want God's Love they would not be happy in heaven where this agape is the only Love.

I’ve not said that there is a problem with God’s love. The problem is that your understanding has it where He only really really loves those who love Him back. The rest are doomed, and that cannot coincide with omnibenevolence.

 

[Hammster]

You quoted:
For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth.
— Deuteronomy 7:6
Jer. 18 explains why some Jews at some time, might not be blessed, because it is contingent on the Jews.

Still nothing to do with my post.

 

[Hammster]

If you replace every instance of sheep with follower in John 10, its easy to see that scripture supports my position.

No, not really. We know that because other scripture shows sheep and goats.

If that is the case it makes no sense for Jesus to give those he denounces as "not my sheep" (John 10:24-28) any reasons to believe in him as he did in John 10:37-38. That would be casting pearls before swine.

He didn’t.

John 10 says nothing about being "elected from before the foundation of the world", but that is what you and many Calvinists believe Jesus meant by sheep. If that is the case why didn't Jesus clearly reference a Calvinist style election. Or why didn't he use a better term to describe those"elected from before the foundation of the world" like "his beloved", "his people", or "the elect".

Actually, He did when He said He only came for the sheep.

When I look up the definition of sheep, I don't see anything about being favored by God in some way. instead, for example, in the Oxford dictionary I see "a person who is too easily influenced or led" included.

Well, as long as the Oxford dictionary says something different…

 

[biblelesson]

What way did God make for the Hittites? You said “God’s decision to destroy these nations was based on their wickedness and influence, and also to destroy the children was based on His foreknowledge of what these children would do once they grew up.” How do you know that was why God destroyed the children? Could it not have been because God has the right to kill anyone at anytime because of their sin?

God provides His reason!

Deuteronomy 20:16-18 KJV,
16 “But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:”

17 “But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee:”

18 “That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the Lord your God.”

 

[Hawkins]

It is analogue to "I love apples". We love apples only when they didn't turn rotten. Similarly, God loves us all (with few exceptions) before we permanently turned wicked in His eyes. On the other hand, a shepherd may not have any love for the wolves. So whoever is defined as wolf may not be liked by God from the very beginning. Some are between the wolves and sheep, they are the goats. Goats don't need a shepherd as the sheep do. We can't tell since when God starts to dislike them.

To put it another way, God never likes whowever He defines as wolves, possibly from the very beginning of their presence or even before. God's love for the goats is temporal, more or less like how we love apples till the point of being rotten. God's love for His sheep is permanent from the very beginning.

Love must have an object. Say, a mother is all-loving but for her kids only. The object a mother applies her "all-loving" is her kids. The object has a scope (i.e., kids to their mother), and may vary with time (i.e., we love apples till they become rotten). A mother's love is unconditional but to her kids only. The term omnibenevolence is a bit misleading, as it doesn't reflect the scope which love applies, and it doesn't reflect how love may vary with time. Generally speaking, God loves everyone but only till the point of being permanently turned rotten/wicked (in God's eyes, that is).

 

[bling]

I’ve not said that there is a problem with God’s love. The problem is that your understanding has it where He only really really loves those who love Him back. The rest are doomed, and that cannot coincide with omnibenevolence.

WOW!!! Not at all! I have repeatedly said: "God Loves Everyone!". Quoting from my post of 371:"but (the problem is) with humans humbly accepting that Love as pure undeserved charity in the form of forgiveness. Humans cannot obtain an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love) unless they humbly accept God's forgiveness (Luke 7 and Matt. 18). If they do not want God's Love, they would not be happy in heaven where this agape is the only Love."
People "doom" themselves by not humbly accepting God's Love for them.

 

[bling]

It is analogue to "I love apples". We love apples only when they didn't turn rotten. Similarly, God loves us all (with few exceptions) before we permanently turned wicked in His eyes. On the other hand, a shepherd may not have any love for the wolves. So whoever is defined as wolf may not be liked by God from the very beginning. Some are between the wolves and sheep, they are the goats. Goats don't need a shepherd as the sheep do. We can't tell since when God starts to dislike them.

To put it another way, God never likes whowever He defines as wolves, possibly from the very beginning of their presence or even before. God's love for the goats is temporal, more or less like how we love apples till the point of being rotten. God's love for His sheep is permanent from the very beginning.

Love must have an object. Say, a mother is all-loving but for her kids only. The object a mother applies her "all-loving" is her kids. The object has a scope (i.e., kids to their mother), and may vary with time (i.e., we love apples till they become rotten). A mother's love is unconditional but to her kids only. The term omnibenevolence is a bit misleading, as it doesn't reflect the scope which love applies, and it doesn't reflect how love may vary with time. Generally speaking, God loves everyone but only till the point of being permanently turned rotten/wicked (in God's eyes, that is).

No. God Loves everyone (this Love is defined by 1 Cor. 13, 1 John 4, everything Christ did and said). We are to "Love" those that hate us and want to kill us (like those first century Christians were to Love Paul when he was Saul killing Christians.

The issue is not with God having some limit to His Love, but with humans humbly accepting that Love as pure undeserved charity in the form of forgiveness. Humans cannot obtain an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love) unless they humbly accept God's forgiveness (Luke 7 and Matt. 18). If they do not want God's Love, they would not be happy in heaven where this agape is the only Love."

People "doom" themselves by not humbly accepting God's Love for them.