Does God love everyone?

Obviously, we'll disagree on this point. I come back to this question: Is there anyone, anywhere on this earth today, who has not heard the gospel? I maintain that if you look deep enough into a place like the South American jungle, you will find such a tribe.

I contend as well that those South American tribesmen, or the people on a Pacific island 2,000 years ago, were not aware of the Hebrews' God, nor of his Son.

Okay, let's say for sake of discussion that they did. Is it not a demonstration of God's love that he sent a missionary to them? Is it not a demonstration of his discriminating love that he sent the missionary to them and not another tribe 100 miles away?

I don't think my position hangs on the existence of a tribe here and there. I think that if there is a single individual in all of history who never heard of the Hebrew God, or never heard of Jesus Christ, my point is made.

 

My Arguement is that Calvinist do not believe the non elect can hear and understand and there fore be saved.
Ktn4eg stated;

This is an old arguement over the meaning of a word. the calvinist say all doesn't mean all to defend there doctrine of total depravity. They want to deny that all men are drawn.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
In this particular verse the word all is all inclusive.
MB

 

You 'case' is ONLY made if I were contending that everyone hears the gospel. Which, once again, I state - No, that is not my contention or view.

Every man (even in the most remote tribes of the world) has been revealed truth by God of Himself, sin, righteousness, and judgment (Rom 1,2. and 3 in spades). If they will believe these things God 'will' send forth the fulness of that truth (the gospel) to them if it is not already being preached there. His grace is not discriminating but His special love for those of faith is though. If the gospel is not there yet it is not because God has looked over them but because they have not believed the truths He has revealed of Himself to them - which they know and understand (again Rom 1:18-32; Prov 1:12-, Ezk 33; 2 Thes 2:10-12) There is a definite knowledge and understanding of all that is revealed but they do not desire to receive it to themselves.

The very fact any man knows anything about God is due purely to His grace for no man knows anything of God except He reveal it to them. But God reveals through His grace those spiritual truths to which all men everywhere are accountable and if they reject it (no matter what the truths are) He will give them over to their sins. He does not give them over to their sinfulness until AFTER They have rejected His truths and thus aspects of the gospel itself because it is made up of those same truths. It is not the gospel itself but to deny any truth God reveals is to deny that which makes up and confirms the gospel message.

So in answer to your question of is the fact the gospel has not be given to every single person in the world a demonstration of His discriminating love?
The answer is a resounding - No. Since it is God in His grace that reveals the basic principles of the gospel (though not specifically the gospel itself) in nature, the conscience, and laws regarding the Godhead, His glory, their sin, and His judgment to come. For what purpose? It is apparent they had a choice because it is only after their rejection of it that He gives them over to their sins. It is not that God didn't know their choice but that in His love He still willingly allows them reject or believe. But what of those who will receive it? Look once again at the Etheopian in Acts or many of the other various examples there-in. He will send His gospel any way necessary to the willing/receptive heart, even if He has to translocate someone to get-er-dun. His love toward the world (all lost sinners) is that He sent forth His Son just as His love sends us out to everyone.

I guess I can not explain it any better than that. The fact that God reveals Himself, sin, His righteousness, and judgment to come is absolutely of grace - for no man can know these things except God reveal them and no man deserves to know - it is grace. Yet why would God reveal it to them if they will still reject it? Because He loves them unless John 3:16 is incorrect in that "He so loved the world".

 

whosoever believeth (Not on condition), and also whosoever WILL believe is a conditional term.
Man by himself is bankrupt concerning condition that he must do the acting upon.

 

Back in 1991 when soldiers were deployed in Desert storm, I was up at our local armory to be with my Brother-in-law the day that his unit was leaving to go to a training facility. Soon the Buses came rolling in to take them there. In about 45 minutes the Sergent shoted "All aboard", Well I or any of their families didn't board the buses. Why wouldn't all the entire group of families start load on to the bus?
at another time, I was told by a Brother in CHRIST that he and another of Man of a different demonination was driving on the interstate and was discussing the topic that "ALL" meant all regardless of what, this brother in CHRIST had told him that it doesn't include all of Adam's race. They were in a pretty heated discussion and during that ride, the dear old Brother pulled over for his pickup truck to be weighed like all the big rigs had to go on to the scales . This friend asked him why was he in the weighing land and he told him that the sign somewhere back had said all trucks in this lane. Well his friend told him that he didn't have to be weighed, it was for only the big rigs. The dear old brother said, 'Well, that's what I have been trying to tell you ever sense we have been driving down the thisinterstate." so you see, all doesn't always mean all. This is how GOD has written upon the pages of the Bible. Some believe because they have been Quickened of GOD, some will never be quickened because GOD left then as they are.
John 5:21 says, "For the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them; so the son quickeneth whom he will."
And Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in sin; and verses 2,3,4,5,6,and 7.
Thats it!
Appalachian-american

 

Are they from somewhere else besides this world?

 

Yes, His justice is to be praised. He is just. He justified me by His blood. An innocent one paid for my sins.

*To the non-calvinists* - Observe once again the calvinist "in the wild". First appeal is not to the Bible but to a confession of faith. Even emphasized as though it were of some importance.

You are a man-follower plain and simple. You can't find anything in the Bible that says what that "confession" says, so you have to post that.

I agree that all God does is perfect, but purposely leaving souls without hope and damnation is not something God has ever done. All souls can be saved without exception. God is not a respecter of persons. Nor is he a liar. "Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely"

 

Yep, those go along with the others I posted. I'm sure there is more than this as well.

As Allan pointed out, this could be God's hating the wicked whom he has given over to wickedness. However, I do not think we can decide who those people are (I am not saying you think that, just making a point).

 

I will not defend any of the contents of what any other person who may have posted anything in this thread. They are all capable of defending themselves. I will only remark about what I (and no one else) have posted on this thread.

Not once did I ever refer to any creed, confession, or whatever else you choose to call it in any of my posts on this thread.

If you can find just one instance where I have sought refuge or cited as any kind of authority to back up anything that I posted anywhere on this thread outside of the Word of God to demonstrate the basic point(s) that I have attempted to show any who've read my posts on this thread, then I would be quite appreciative to have these specific instances pointed out to me.

I have supplied numerous scriptures from the KJV (not that I'm a "KJV-Onlyist" because I'm not and have submitted several postings on other threads that will clearly state that) that as I understand these passages in context and using the applicable and generally accepted principles of hermeneutics to demonstrate why I believe what I do regarding the doctrines of grace as they apply to this aspect of soteriology.

If any other brother or sister in Christ chooses to believe differently than I do, then that is your right to do so as a full-fledged member of God's family who is exercising his perogatives in the priesthood of all believers.

Not once did I ever allude to the notion that God somehow enjoys it when He sees any of His created beings enter into the eternal realm of being separated from Him in that place most of us would call Hell.

But, on the other hand, neither have I found a totally scriptural basis for those who would contend that a spiritually dead person as God's Word states in Ephesians 2 that all of us are apart from God taking the initiative to, as the KJV would call it, "quicken" us such that we would have any desire to repent of our sinful ways and receive Jesus Christ by faith as one's personal Savior.

What about the ones who do not "thirst"? Does God somehow drag them to the Fountain of Life and demand of this unthirsty person partake of its contents?

What about the "whosoever won'ts"? Are they in their spiritually dead state going to come to Christ?

What of those who aren't hungry for the Bread of Life? Does God force feed them anyway?

You're probably saying, "Don't be ridiculous. Of course He doesn't!"

So, then is God some how not "fair"?

EX: You are the governor of a state here in the USA. As such, you have within your state constitutional powers the right to pardon anyone serving time in your state's penal system because he/she was declared guilty of violating some state law.

For reasons maybe best known only to you and God you choose to declare a few of these prisoners pardoned. You have the right and the authority to do so and thus you do so.

Did you act in an unconstitional manner when you chose to exercise your constitutional authority and power as chief executive of that state when you pardoned those prisoners?

Of course you didn't. You did what you did because you chose to do what you did.

But what about the remaining prisoners that you chose not to pardon?

All of the prisioners were guilty of whatever crime(s) they committed. All would be imprisioned for committing these crimes for whatever the length of their sentences may be.

The ones you pardoned weren't--in and of themselves--any better prisioners than those you chose not to pardon.

Did you as governor of that state act in any unlawful manner when you chose only to pardon those that you did instead of pardoning all of the other remaining prisoners?

I think not.

So, why then do you persist at (at least figuratively speaking) pointing your finger in God's face and tell the thrice holy Creator of the Entire Universe that He's a "bad boy" for not continuing to allow the rest of the human race to go on enjoying what they enjoy doing in the first place?

Look at it this way:

There's this gate to a city that's closed, but has inscribed over it these words in giant letters:
"WHOSOEVER WILL LET HIM ENTER HEREIN!"

A certain individual decides to open this massive gate and thereby attain access to the city.

He looks back at this huge gate and reads the following words in giant letters over the reverse side of that very same gate:
"ELECT ACCORDING TO THE FOREKNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER!"

Same gate, two different sides to the same gate, and two different passages from the very same Word of God.

 

What? I wasn't even talking to you. I was addressing Dr. Bob.

As for the rest of it - standard calvinist appeal to faulty logic and a false premise that the spiritually dead can't come to Christ for life. You won't find that anywhere in scripture.

The spiritually dead are dead in trespasses and sins, but they aren't physically dead. Their spirit is dead. They can still come to Christ for life. And you cannot find a verse that says otherwise. This is where your logic comes into it.

"Dead people can't do anything - so God has to regenerate them before they can come to Christ". But that's not biblical.

Jesus saved me. If God had not drawn me, I would not have come to Him. Praise the Lord that Joh 12:32 is in the Bible. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. .

I'm one of those all men.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear to me that what you are trying to say is that what Jesus Christ, according to how John 12:32 records it, said is that when He was crucified and then resurrected, He drew every individual person with out exception who was living on planet earth from that time forward unto Himself.

Thus Jesus Christ successfully drew such individuals to Himself as Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Mao Tse-tung, Ho Chi Minh, the leaders of the Cambodian Khmer Rouge, the ruling elements of the massive genocide in Rwanda, Idi Amin of Uganda, Osama bin Laden and the leaders of the Taliban movement--to name just a few.

He succeeded in drawing all of the above-mentioned individuals (and a whole lot more just like them) because every last one of them were included in the "all men" of John 12:32.

Having thus drawn all of the above-mentioned "men" unto Himself, what exactly did Christ subsequently do with these "men" is my question to you.

In your case and mine, He drew the two of us into a saving relationship with Him.

So, please tell me, exactly where will the above-mentioned "men" spend eternity?

The Word of God only presents two options.

Unless I've totally misread your postings, what you are trying to tell me is that a totally depraved person just, all of the sudden, and apart from any divine intervention or instrumentality whatsoever, possesses the inherent capacity to choose for himself to repent of his sins and--by himself--receive Jesus Christ as his own personal Savior.

If such is the case, then you've finally, beyond any shadow of doubt whatsoever upon the face of this earth supplied me with the absolute correct understanding of the real meaning of such passages as Acts 13:48; Romans 3:23, 8:29-30, 9:13-21 & 33; Ephesians 1:4-5 & 11; Philippians 1:6; 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9, 2:10-12, 3:2, 4:14; Titus 3:5-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Peter 2:11-17; and Jude 4-5, 14-15 (to cite just a few) that I find in the very same Bible as I do John 12:32.

Thank you very much, my dear friend, for doing this for me!

 

Sorry I missed this brother.

I am speaking about this extensively in the "Ordo Salutis 2 - The Regeneration" thread which you are welcome to join in on. It is duscussing what constitutes being born/regenerate and thus when it happens.

Your usage of 'dead' I believe is not what the apostle Paul had in mind. Since the usage is in reference to the spiritual and not the physical we have a specific meaning that need be applied. Then the question is - Is this meaning the same as the physical understanding of dead?

Well, I believe we can see this is not the case when we look another time 'dead' is used in the spiritual context in the same book - where Paul states that believers are dead to sin (Rom 6;2) and even that we as believers are dead to the law in the same book (Romans 7:4). If your wooden literal definition were to hold water then what Paul is telling believers here is that they are unable to sin because they are dead (no longer alive) to it. The 'dead' term Pual is uses is to illstrate a relationship issue. Thus the usage pitting one aspect (in sin) and not saved, against the other (to sin) but that they are saved.

We are dead IN our tresspasses and sins - We have no life (relationship to God) because we are in sin and He has no sin. Thus relationship severed.

Now I agree that man left to himself can not of or by himself come to the knowledge of God much less come to saving faith in God. Yet scripture speaks of God coming first (taking the initiative toward, I believe, all men everywhere Rom 1:18-32; 2) revealing to them truth via the Holy Spirit (John 16:7-8).


But I will say in order to keep this thread from going off course please come to the thread I have previously provided.

 

Amen, me too. Preach it, my kindred brother.

 

I found this humorous when Lukasaurus has Peter Ruckman prominently displayed in his avatar.

 

Yeah,birds of a feather do tend to flock together.

 

First - why you keep stating (without any warrent to do so) that those who do not accept Calvinism must be holding to Pelagianism (man coming to God appart from any divine influence or grace). Please show where anyone has made any such statements or please cease from such references.

Secondly, drawing does not necessitate salvation. The term 'draw' simply means the intent to bring soemthing from one point to another. The reference of being 'drawn' isn't specifically that they are saved because they were drawn, but refers instead it is coming to know the truth concerning Jesus - which only God can reveal. We see this in the fact that Jesus states the only ones who will be raised up 'are not' the ones who were 'drawn' but those who have believed. You must superimpose your view upon the text in order to make such a presumption taht being drawn equates to being saved or only those saved are drawn.

The fact a sword is drawn does not necessitate that one will use it. The drawing is an action to which the object that is being drawn brings it to a place where options are now available, which were not available prior to it's being drawn. However, men are not sword and though the sword must do whatever it's wielder desires (it has none) a person God has given the responsibility of will -whereby He draws them to a point they could not come to of or by themselves but it is at this point they must choose to accept what God says or reject it.

 

Amen, seen as some flock to preach God's hate, my non-kindred tweety bird brother.

 

All Scripture From TNIV

Drawing is always,without fail to salvation.Let's go to John 6.

V.37: All whom the Father gives me will come to me,and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.
V.38 : For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.
V.39 : And this is the will of him who sent me,that I shall lose none of all those he has given me,but raise them up at the last day.
V.44 : No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them,and I will raise them up at the last day.
V.65 : He went on to say,"This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them."

The only ones so drawn are the very ones raised up.The Father gives Christ certain ones who will come to Him.All those the Father gives to the Son will be raised up at the last day.The only ones that come to Christ are the ones that the Father has drawn.Only those that the Father so enables will come to Christ.

There is no superimposition upon the text to understand that the Father's drawing is always toward saving completion with Christ.Don't "draw" your own conclusions apart from submitting to the authority of God's Word -- not your personal philosophy.

You see this is where you're engaging in babble -- you certainly are not engaging the biblical text."Options are now available".C'Mon! Get biblical for once.

 

Okay,so you don't believe in the whole counsel of the Word of God.

God is love;but love is not God.That is not His sole attribute.Do you think that His justice,wrath,and holiness should also be swept under the rug?

I have personally met folks that have denied that the Bible teaches the doctrine of predestination.They did not care that I could show them evidence in the Bible for it -- their minds were made up.

You deny the verses in the Scriptures which clearly state that God hates some people.How far do you wish to go in denying biblical doctrines?Where will it stop?

I certainly do not advocate having a series of sermons on the Hatred of God but when it comes up in the text -- what would you do if you were a preacher?Would you evade those verses?Would you like to excise them?

 

I noticed you chose NOT to place the passages of scripture from John which state what I said about those believing being raised up and not those who are drawn.

And no my friend scripture does not state in any fashion the 'drawing' is always results in salvation. It is always FOR salvation but not TO salvation. The fact that all God gives to Christ must come to Him does not in anyway refute what I stated. The only one who deny this are the primitive Baptists who claim that not everyone saved must come to Christ. Christ is making the statement that no one can be saved unless they come to Him and no one can do that unless the Father draws Him. To go beyond the text is foolishness.

John 6:44 is my point in spades! No man can be saved (come to Christ) unless He is drawn. The drawing of God can lead to salvation but it does not do so always. But if you will notice quite few times Jesus re-iterates that only those who believe - not those who are drawn- will be raised up. This is the will of Him who sent me...he that believes... will be raised up.

Why does Jesus make this point so clearly, because only those who excercise their faith in Christ are saved, NOT those who are drawn to Him. Again - why? Because it is no garrentee that those who are drawn will believe. However it is a garrentee that those who believe will be saved. So what was Jesus point of 'drawing'? That no man just up and comes to Christ of or by himself but that it must be an act of God which brings him there.
Would you agree that the 'drawing' of God is synonomous with the 'calling' of God?


Rippon, would you agree that His 'drawing' and His 'calling' are one and the same thing?