For those who argue for the omnibenevolence of God…

Fervent said:

What do you think "respecter of persons" means?

Click to expand...

bling said:

You said: "God commanded Jeremiah to not pray for the people. That violates what I’ve seen some argue as God being all-loving."
No! it does not!

You cannot pray people into heaven.

They might have been going through all the rituals correctly, but God looks at the hearts of people and their hearts were not humbly accepting His help as pure charity. God, through Jerimiah, was telling them to surrender to the Babylonians and live, but they refused God's help (Love). God was going to have to severely discipline them to help those who will live through it, so Jerimiah should not be asking God to not severely discipline them.

Click to expand...

bling said:

It is "discipline" for those that are still alive and see what the punishment/discipline is for sever disobedience.
The "Old Law" had many sins, disciplined with death and it would keep many from doing that sin and/or seeking God's forgiveness immediately after committing the sin.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

That is far too limiting for what is said, and an abuse of context rather than a legitimate application. No respecter of persons means God is impartial, showing no favortism.

Click to expand...

bling said:

Being under a death sentence for stuff you have done, hopefully will cause you to repent, the turning to God (like we see with King David) can save the person, but not always from physical death. In those cases, the death discipline helps everyone.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

You're confusing application with meaning, which are not the same thing. Nothing in the context implies such a limitation.

Click to expand...

John Mullally said:

Why would God be so indignant over Israel’s sin and rebellion? Perhaps they had the legitimate opportunity to have done otherwise and yet refused, then God’s indignation would make much more sense.

In a sort of negative proof of the power of prayer, three times God commanded Jeremiah to stop praying; God wanted no alteration in his plans to punish a rebellious nation. Prayer had, after all, softened God’s resolve before.

Click to expand...

Fervent said:

Again, you're conflating how the statement was applied with its meaning. Nothing in the context limits the meaning of the phrase to that specific application, and it's unnatural to force it to such limitations since the phrase itself implies a much broader principle being drawn on.

Click to expand...

John Mullally said:

FYI: A respecter of persons and one who shows partiality is one who exhibits favoritism and is benevolent only to those "favorites" - thus not omni-benevolent. But wait scripture, says that God is not a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34) and shows no partiality (James 3:17).

Calvinists assert that the ‘elect,’ like all mankind by their view, were once totally depraved, incurably set against God and incapable of believing the gospel, thus they have no more to commend them to God’s grace than the ‘non-elect.’ But due to a "irresistible grace" reserved for his favorite unbelievers (i.e. the elect before they believe), God forcibly changes their hearts so that only they believe and are saved. It is that doctrine that shows God is not omni-benevolent and unjust.

Tragically, Calvinism robs us of what ought to be ‘the greatest story ever told.’It reduces God’s love to a form of favoritism without passion, and it denies man the capacity of responding from his heart, thereby robbing God of the joy of a genuine response from man (as God must use irresistible methods [i.e. puppetry] to trigger man's positive response) and the glory it alone can bring.

Click to expand...