Does God love all or some?

fhansen said:

You have to understand though, that if I have to provide a measurement for how much is enough, then you’re implying that no degree of unrighteousness, no matter how wanton and heinous, can be too much to keep us from being saved.

Click to expand...

How could any of us be saved if that isn't true? It's not about us. Never was.

The good deeds are an outflow of God's work in our lives, not a measure of whether we WILL BE saved.

In the same way bad deeds are an outflow of the heart and will need to be corrected in the afterlife. IMHO

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

Malachi 3:2
But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.

True Counterphobia said:

... Your jokes are not in love. ...

Click to expand...

Perhaps I don't love everyone the same way. - lol

Saint Steven said:

Perhaps I don't love everyone the same way. - lol

Click to expand...

The problem is your directing this at me. The cognitive dissonance is real.

True Counterphobia said:

The problem is your directing this at me. The cognitive dissonance is real.

Click to expand...

No, the cognitive dissonance is with Damnationism.

God is love = eternal conscious torment

Now THAT'S cognitive dissonance.

Saint Steven said:

No, the cognitive dissonance is with Damnationism.

God is love = eternal conscious torment

Now THAT'S cognitive dissonance.

Click to expand...

Oh, yes. The solution is so simple. All one needs to do is read a book to discover this obvious misstep.

You're claiming it is simple now, but you had to be indoctrinated by a couple books for you to see how obvious it is. Since then, you've become pretty confident in your view it seems.

Religiot said:

You overlook the key words 'brother' and 'sister'.

I'm to love the workers of iniquity in the same way God does--allowing the build up of wrath, to cover them in fire, to the glory of God.

Click to expand...

The sister text to this is Matthew 5:28 with no brother or sister qualifier.

Overlooking the point that our intents also count as sins as vile as others, in this case, hating = murder, is quite the rotten camel to swallow.

Michael Collum said:

The sister text to this is Matthew 5:28 with no brother or sister qualifier.

Overlooking the point that our intents also count as sins as vile as others, in this case, hating = murder, is quite the rotten camel to swallow.

Click to expand...

Again, you overlook the obvious, and the critical:

"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." --Matthew 5:28

The text says nothing about love or hate.

Hating is not equal to murder!

You're twisting the scriptures, and without any real reason! Why?

Only murderers hate their brother, but those who hate murderers have a heart after God's own:

"Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men. For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain. Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: and see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting." --Psalms 139:19-24

David's perfect hatred was only due to his fervent love toward God: so too is God's perfect hatred from His perfect love--for He is love, thus His hatred is perfect.

You can only hate solely as much as you love.

Take narcissists, for example, their great hatred of anyone who comes against them is due to their great love for themselves: for they love themselves above anyone else.

The more you love, the more you hate, it's inescapable.

It was by His great love for what was once good, that God destroyed the whole world by a flood.

It will also be by His great love for what is to come, that He will destroy the whole world by fire.

This hatred of evil only comes from the love of good.

--truly, I'm impressed with how far we've all gotten from what is simply true.

May God continue His mercy on us all. Amen.

Religiot said:

Hating is not equal to murder!

Click to expand...

When the scripture stops meaning what it says, there's no further need for discussion.

Michael Collum said:

When the scripture stops meaning what it says, there's no further need for discussion.

Click to expand...

Did you not bother to read what I wrote?

What motivation do you have to display such hatred?

I took the time to answer you, and by the scriptures; yet here you are, plucking a sentence from my statement, out of context, and then falsely accusing me of contradicting the scriptures: why?

Why not do as I did with you, and out of love, took the time out of my day to respond to you by the scriptures, as you requested.

--Not even in a secular court is such contempt permissible; yet here you are, ironically, in a Christian forum, where the topic is directly about Christian love.

The irony alone, should give you pause.

I suggest you actually read what I said before passing judgment.

True Counterphobia said:

So the question is essentially asking me if I would favor a comfortable lie over an uncomfortable truth.

Click to expand...

Do you consider the prospect of universal restoration being true “uncomfortable”? Perhaps you can’t answer again because that’s another hypothetical question, a question that could “compromise” yourself and ruin integrity.

True Counterphobia said:

They cause divisions of the mind that force you to compromise yourself, which I will not have a part of.

Click to expand...

Hypotheticals are about possibilities, entertaining possibilities, including the possibility that you’re mistaken, they’re not about “compromising yourself” or about a lack of integrity.

True Counterphobia said:

You want to compromise your own integrity? Go for it, but count me out.

Click to expand...

Counting yourself out of answering a simple autobiographical question. That only goes to show you can’t handle the prospect of even entertaining that you’re mistaken.

It’s really the height of fear.

Cormack said:

Do you consider the prospect of universal restoration being true “uncomfortable”? Perhaps you can’t answer again because that’s another hypothetical question, a question that could “compromise” yourself and ruin integrity.



Hypotheticals are about possibilities, entertaining possibilities, including the possibility that you’re mistaken, they’re not about “compromising yourself” or about a lack of integrity.



Counting yourself out of answering a simple autobiographical question. That only goes to show you can’t handle the prospect of even entertaining that you’re mistaken.

It’s really the height of fear.

Click to expand...

Let me restate it. Hypotheticals do not accurately measure reality. That is why we call them hypotheticals. For example, consider the trolley problem. What good comes out of that problem? Are we any closer to a "solution" to the problem or is it just endlessly pontificating on a situation that almost no one will have to deal with?

I consider the fact that God is just something that speaks for itself. Why would I want to "play God" as that is essentially what you are asking me to do with your hypothetical.

True Counterphobia said:

Hypotheticals do not accurately measure reality. That is why we call them hypotheticals.

Click to expand...

We actually call hypotheticals hypotheticals because they’re related to a hypothesis, the hypothesis being that universal restoration were true, that you’re mistaken and whether or not you’re comfortable being mistaken.

Again you ignored my previous question on that front.

It appears you consider the prospect of people burning, being annihilated or lost forever more comfortable than those same people being saved, because in the situation where people are lost at least your doctrines are correct.

The problem is that you tie Gods “justness” into your own correctness when it comes to doctrinal beliefs.

Cormack said:

more comfortable

Click to expand...

No, that's the opposite of what I mean.

Cormack said:

We actually call hypotheticals hypotheticals because they’re related to a hypothesis, the hypothesis being that universal restoration were true, that you’re mistaken and whether or not you’re comfortable being mistaken.

Again you ignored my previous question on that front.

It appears you consider the prospect of people burning, being annihilated or lost forever more comfortable than those same people being saved, because in the situation where people are lost at least your doctrines are correct.

The problem is that you tie Gods “justness” into your own correctness when it comes to doctrinal beliefs.

Click to expand...

Spot on.

God loves all of us just the same.

God doesn't love like we do. We don't love everyone the same and we probably all know some people who we don't love at all and maybe even hate. And that's reasonable and rational: it is just and fair to love the victim more than the absuser. But God's love is unreasonable/beyond reason because "while we were yet sinners Christ died for us". Many people say that they came face to face with God's love when they were at their very worst. It God didn't lovem them then then there is really no Good News for anyone. We are all sinners even if it is to different degrees and it's only because of God's amazing and totally unreasonable love and grace that any of us, even the most saint like, are saved.

That’s actually an excellent point, @Hmm. Christians believe in a God of supernatural love, it’s not just love from a supernatural being who himself is above the natural order of things, rather the love itself is above the natural order of things. God expresses incredible love.

When people attempt to parse Gods love and section off an exclusive form of love (a form always reserved for themselves) they’re really just making Gods love into human love.

Christians of quick wit, good conscience (or just nervous people) realise that this hoarding of Gods love creates a situation where nobody is confidently being loved, they’re now in an abusive daisy chain singing “He loves me, he loves me not, he loves me, he loves me not.”

It’s a very low view of Gods love which in turn leads to a low view of others and ultimately of our own selves, since if God won’t love someone with His deepest love, why then should you love them?

Saint Steven said:

Did Christ succeed, or fail, at his mission?

Click to expand...

Succeeded, of course.

Saint Steven said:

1 John 4:14
And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world.

Click to expand...

Yes, Christ died to save everyone, the world, from their sin.
But people still need to believe in him and receive his salvation. Otherwise there would have been no point in Jesus preaching repentance - he might as well have said "believe what you like, come to me or not; you'll be saved eventually anyway." Or "yes, you hate God now, and want to live a life of sin now, but you are going to be saved and spend eternity singing 'alleluia', like it or not."

The gift of God is eternal life in Christ, Romans 6:23 - not everyone will accept that gift.

Saint Steven said:

Anyone who has knees to bow and a tongue to speak, in heaven and on earth and under the earth (in the realm of the dead), will whole-heartedly, and without reservation, acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord. No one can say that “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit. If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” you will be saved.

Click to expand...

This was really an excellent point. I’ve argued the whole “every knee will bow” material elsewhere on CF, and I know it’s always used in reference to faithful believing people (not sinners forced onto bowed knees,) but to teach that in light of 1 Corinthians 12:3 is just... That never occurred to me.

I’m 100% stealing that

He loves all, but somes some more than others.