Does God operate at a lower standard of morality/ethics than he requires of us?

[UsernamedNamedUser]

Why would it take "a lot for God to be that patient with them"?
Is he easily angered? That doesn't sound very patient at all.

Why would any human not deserve to be loved?
Didn't God give his only begotten to redeem all of humankind?

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

It takes a lot to be patient with them because they do a lot to him. They kill his followers. They curse his Son. They have no regard for Him in their heart. They commit all sorts of heinous debaucheries as well.

As for why some humans will not be loved and will not inherit the kingdom of God, Paul goes into great detail here:

1 Corinthians 6:

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who submit to or perform homosexual acts, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor verbal abusers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

God gave Jesus as a free gift to all, that is correct. But does that mean all of humanity will accept this free gift? No, for some are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. In the end some are made to receive this free gift and all of God's grace while others are made to reject this gift and continue in debauchery.

Free will is the ability to freely follow oneself. but not to choose oneself. God handed down each person's will to them when he created them. They are free to follow their own will, but God made it by being the creator.

 

[Saint Steven]

In the end some are made to receive this free gift and all of God's grace while others are made to reject this gift and continue in debauchery.

Made?

Some "are made to reject this gift..." ???
Created to reject the gift of salvation?

Who created them that way?
Made to suffer eternal conscious torment?

 

[Saint Steven]

It takes a lot to be patient with them because they do a lot to him. They kill his followers. They curse his Son. They have no regard for Him in their heart. They commit all sorts of heinous debaucheries as well.

Does God not require us to forgive, no matter what is done to us?
This is the double standard in our doctrine that I am addressing in this topic.

Matthew 6:15 NIV
But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

Made?

Some "are made to reject this gift..." ???
Created to reject the gift of salvation?

Who created them that way?
Made to suffer eternal conscious torment?

Yes, some are. I'll give you an example. Let's say you have 2 people who are equally free, but one chooses God while the other chooses Satan. Why did they choose different paths?

The free will answer is that because they are free to do so. Ok, but why did one choose different than the other. They are equally free, so wouldn't they both make the logical choice and choose God. Who would freely choose hell? Would you freely choose to burn? In the end no one would freely choose that since God's greatness far outshines the burdens of hell. But not all are offered that choice. As it is written:

"What if God, intending to show His wrath and make His power known, bore with great patience the vessels of His wrath, prepared for destruction?" (Romans 9:22)

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

Does God not require us to forgive, no matter what is done to us?
This is the double standard in our doctrine that I am addressing in this topic.

Matthew 6:15 NIV
But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

The contingent for that verse is they come to you asking for forgiveness. If you are asked, forgive. Forgive as God forgives. God does not forgive those who do not come to Him, but he does forgive those who do come to Him. We are to forgive those who come to us just as God forgave us when we came to Him

 

[Fervent]

The contingent for that verse is they come to you asking for forgiveness. If you are asked, forgive. Forgive as God forgives. God does not forgive those who do not come to Him, but he does forgive those who do come to Him. We are to forgive those who come to us just as God forgave us when we came to Him

While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Where does us coming to God first make sense in that?

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes, some are. I'll give you an example. Let's say you have 2 people who are equally free, but one chooses God while the other chooses Satan. Why did they choose different paths?

The free will answer is that because they are free to do so. Ok, but why did one choose different than the other. They are equally free, so wouldn't they both make the logical choice and choose God. Who would freely choose hell? Would you freely choose to burn? In the end no one would freely choose that since God's greatness far outshines the burdens of hell. But not all are offered that choice. As it is written:

"What if God, intending to show His wrath and make His power known, bore with great patience the vessels of His wrath, prepared for destruction?" (Romans 9:22)

That verse begins with, "What if...", which means it is a hypothetical statement.

As you say, "Who would freely choose hell?"
Obviously, no one wants that, but you say that God consigns it to us?
How is that love and patience?

Thanks for staying in the discussion. Your patience with me may be wearing thin by now.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Where does us coming to God first make sense in that?

The sins weren't forgiven until you come to God though. If the sins were forgiven before you come then what do you have to repent of first?

 

[Fervent]

The sins weren't forgiven until you come to God though. If the sins were forgiven before you come then what do you have to repent of first?

So you're saying when Jesus asked for the Father to forgive those crucifying Him, it was insincere?

Repentance isn't just a matter of asking forgiveness for sins, there's a whole lot more to it than that.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

That verse begins with, "What if...", which means it is a hypothetical statement.

As you say, "Who would freely choose hell?"
Obviously, no one wants that, but you say that God consigns it to us?
How is that love and patience?

Thanks for staying in the discussion. Your patience with me may be wearing thin by now.

The "What if' is used as What if this, which is true, was true. For example, say there is a green blanket. Someone says it is blue. I say," What if that blanket were green."

As for how God cosigning people as vessels of wrath and that not contradicting his love, this verse applies:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

As for my patience wearing thin, you don't need to worry about that. It hasn't worn down really at all

 

[Hmm]

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

That does not imply that He will not have mercy and compassion on all though. Many here on CF for example seem to hate the idea that that will be the case and so perhaps His remark was intended for people like holding that view? That is, the exact opposite of how it's usually interpreted.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

So you're saying when Jesus asked for the Father to forgive those crucifying Him, it was insincere?

Repentance isn't just a matter of asking forgiveness for sins, there's a whole lot more to it than that.

Jesus' action right there does not contradict the cycle of coming to God and asking forgiveness. Jesus asked God to forgive them for what they were doing, crucifying Him, for they did not know what they were doing. He was not asking God to forgive all their sins from birth to present. So Jesus can still be sincere and the natural cycle remains.

But a part of repentance is asking God to forgive you all your sins from birth till present. This would not be part of repentance though if what you are saying is correct as Jesus took our sins away while we were still sinners. But it is part of repentance because Jesus does not take away one's since until they come to God. You must repent to receive Jesus and have your sins washed away.

Jesus died for us while we were still in our sin. Indeed, God also prepared a place for us while we were still in our sin. God layd the road out for us while we were full of debauchery. God's mercy is immense, he did all those things while we did not care about Him, and we owe Him greatly for that. But to receive what has been prepared one must repent.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

That does not imply that He will not have mercy and compassion on all though. Many here on CF for example seem to hate the idea that that will be the case and so perhaps His remark was intended for people like holding that view? That is, the exact opposite of how it's usually interpreted.

Context is important here.

So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Certainly not! For He says to Moses:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,

and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

Paul is using that verse to justify when God said," Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." So he had mercy on Jacob because he wanted to, but he didn't have mercy on Esau because he didn't want to. God will have mercy on whoever he wishes, and Esau and Jacob prove that isn't uniform.

 

[Saint Steven]

As for how God cosigning people as vessels of wrath and that not contradicting his love, this verse applies:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

That doesn't support your point. Here's why...
The difference between "mercy" and "compassion" are as follows...

"Mercy" is when we don't get the bad thing that we deserve.
"Compassion" is when we get the good thing we don't deserve.
Does that make sense?

So, both are positives. Not good for one and bad for the other.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

That doesn't support your point. Here's why...
The difference between "mercy" and "compassion" are as follows...

"Mercy" is when we don't get the bad thing that we deserve.
"Compassion" is when we get the good thing we don't deserve.
Does that make sense?

So, both are positives. Not good for one and bad for the other.

Both are positive? Correct, but they aren't opposites. It's not like God having mercy on one section of humanity means he has to have compassion on the rest. In the end he has mercy and compassion on who he wants, and he can choose to have mercy and compassion on one person and not on another.

In fact, Paul used that verse to support such an example.

"So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Certainly not! For He says to Moses:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,

and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

God had mercy/compassion and Jacob and did not have mercy/compassion on Esau. And Paul used the verse to justify this instance.

 

[Hmm]

Context is important here.

It is indeed. And the main context, or reference point, of scripture is Jesus who didn't hate anyone, whether they were called Jacob or Esau, or Bill or Ahmed, but rather came with a message of love. And He was crucified for it and we need to remember that and stop projecting and preaching a gospel of hate.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

It is indeed. And the main context, or reference point, of scripture is Jesus who didn't hate anyone, whether they were called Jacob or Esau, or Bill or Ahmed, but rather came with a message of love. And He was crucified for it and we need to remember that and stop projecting and preaching a gospel of hate.

Do you think Jesus came to bring peace to the earth?

 

[Hmm]

Do you think Jesus came to bring peace to the earth?

That sounds like you have a pseudo-intellectual trap for me. I don't play those games, sorry.

 

[UsernamedNamedUser]

That sounds like you have a pseudo-intellectual trap for me. I don't play those games, sorry.

Wasn't even a trap. It's right in the scripture.

Matthew 10:34-39

"Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

‘a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

36A man’s enemies will be the members

of his own household.’i

37Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; 38and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. 39Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it."

One must lose their life to find it, and the process of losing it is anything but painless. Then again that's part of what makes the road narrow.

 

[Servus]

The same could be said of a God that doesn't set boundaries and enforce consequences, so what you're dealing with is an issue of framing rather than an issue of morality. In your question, you have placed yourself in the role of God's judge....a dangerous place to be. Certainly, God's morality and ethics will be greater than human morality and ethics, but that does not mean that humans grasping in the dark with limited knowledge are able to make grand pronouncements enforcing their opinions on morality on God. We must wrestle with God as He has chosen to reveal Himself, which at times presents difficulties for our opinions of morality. Faith is the recognition that even when we struggle to see the morality in God's action(for instance, commanding the Israelites to commit genocide) that ultimatly it is God who is in the right and the issue is with our knowledge. So to begin with the premise that your morality is correct and so must alter what is revealed within the text of Scripture is a serious error.

I'm not sure if it's placing oneself in the role of God's judge, or judging how man describes God. What you said about man grasping the dark with limited knowledge supports that. Also I don't think God ordered genocide, because the people who are described as being as being wiped out, appear again and Israel has dealings with them. And again, I think it's man's version of God's morality that's being challenged. Universalists I've listed to consider it highly offensive along the lines of blasphemy.