Romans 8:38-?Does God love all men?

you have many words Bob but no substance.

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


it is rewritten: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I loved."

few words much substance.

john.

 

Single example of God's choice!

Why don't we have more examples if the principle is GLOBAL!

 

I fail to see any contradiction. Loving all does not mean saving all. Loving all does not mean giving grace to all. Loving all does not mean being happy with all.

I love my kids as unconditionally as humanly possible. But I don't always like them the same.

You're assuming that God hating someone means he doesn't love them. Scripturally, hate is not the scriptural absence of love. If my kids are rebellious, I can love them and hate them at the same time.

 

Hello Wes.
it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Is it wrong? Single example means you agree with it? No?
How many examples do you need?

You won't get any more examples from me. This comes with it's own proof. Why does He still blame us Wes?

john.

 

Hello Johnv.

I am assuming nothing and I leave the English language undamaged I think. To say that you can love a person while you hate the person means that you are defining something wrong.
Love is not a feeling it's an act of the will. Hate likewise. We must not bring feelings in before the decision is made either to love or hate. To hate is as much of a decision as love is. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails.

If there is any love in hate then hate ain't hate. Hate is the opposite to love. I cannot understand why words are not taken for what they mean. And if there is hate in love then it is not love. Love always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres..

What you mean if? You mistake decision making with feelings. I want to kill em sometimes but I love them.

it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
Loved and hated are opposite and meant to be understood as opposite.
Hatred is not primarily a feeling in God but a choice to do harm. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Romans 9:17.

God's love will never fail. He cannot harm those He has chosen to love because that is the meaning of love. Love does not fail.

john.

 

Well, then, we have a problem, because Jesus tells us"If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own
life, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:26). It's scripturally clear, however, that we're called not to withhold love from people, but to bestow love to people. If you insist that scripture adheres to the English rules of definition, you're calling God a liar.

Let's look at these passages in their TR Hebrew. The Hebrew word used in Genesis and Malachi passage is sawnay, which we translate as "hate". The issue, though, revolves around the cultural Hebrew meaning of the word. If I say that I hate broccoli, it means that I intensely dislike it. But sawnay in the Hebrew here means. The Hebrew context is that God loved both Esau and Jacob, but He loved Jacob more, and chose to give Jacob special status.

This is confirmed in the New Testament. In the Luke 14:26 passage, Jesus wasn’t telling us to dislike/hate our family and relatives. He wanted us to love one another with a sacrificial love, but love Him more (the Greek word miseho, translated "hate", contextually means "to love less".

I would scripturally disagree with you. Unconditional (agape) love is a decision. Hate is a feeling. Agape in scripture is consistently attributed as an action (we do not have an exact word in English for Agape. Hate, as we understand it in the English, in scripture is not.

 

Hello Johnv.

I do not have to worry about the cultural meaning of a word that is being used as the word chosen by the translators has included it's cultural meaning by the word chosen. Is that not so? If the translators have used the word hate for the corresponding word in Greek or Hebrew that meaning must also be there? If the word tranlated hate really meant loved less then the translators would have translated it that way no?
as it is written: "Jacob I loved Esau I loved less."
Your argument is based on scholarship and I am a peon. I look at the words in the bible and trust my God has provided as He promised me He would and He has. I am a fool to believe that God hated Esau but I would rather be a fool than clever. Being clever makes one think that love is hate and hate is love and Jesus is sweet and God is in want.
Is it translated in any bible as God did not like Esau as much as He liked Jacob?
But Romans is proof enough of itself I think. Why does Paul say, "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?" Right after, "13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."? (KJV and NIV have 'hate'.)
Why does God's righteousness come into question if it was to do with Jacob and Esau to prove themselves?
Why does Paul go onto say that God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and He will have compassion on whom He will have compassion if He was not reinforcing the idea that it is God that is Sovereign and Esau didn't have a prayer?

We have a term for it. True love. A decision to always protect, always trust, always hope, always persevere. 1CO 13:8 Love never fails.
But if you want to see hate in action take a gander at Rev 19:15 ...He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. Sovereign.

Me? As if I would call God a liar! But this comes down on me because I said God said He hated Esau which it says in the bible that He wrote so if I said that I believe God then I make God out to be a liar is I must say brilliantly conceived and executed. HaHa! Because I believe God I make Him out a liar. You have been in California too long one fears! HaHa!

The decision to put God first means just that. If He commands you to leave your family in distress then you must leave them. Simple. MT 8:21 Another disciple said to him, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father." 22 But Jesus told him, "Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead."


john.

 

You should worry about it if the meaning changes scripture. If you interpret this verse to imply that God withholds love, then you're changing scripture.

Unfortunately for us, Hebrew and Greek do not translate perfectly into English. This case is a good example. In fact, there are several words in the Greek for love, but we in English only have one.

That's not the problem. The problem is that you refuse to study scripture, choosing instead to remain ignorant by adompting a false assumption.

If you presume that the meaning in English supercedes the meaning of the source texts, then yes, you're calling God a liar, since he either lied in the English, or lied in the Hebrew. No way around it.

But you don't believe God, you believe a word definition over God's Word. You've added to scripture.

No, I'm simply capable of reading some basic Greek and Hebrew. I'm capable of doing so Bible study. I'm capable of scriptural discernment. My location on the planet earth, and your infantile insults based on my location, are irrelevant.

Thise verse has nothing to do with scriptural grammar discernment.

 

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

The long suffering department means it don't it? It actually means long suffering! Funny that. One would think that one would get used to it.

Just in case the above did not catch your eye I say it again but not I but the Word of God.

it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." Romans 9:13.

john. </font>[/QUOTE]A HEARTY AMEN!

 

Hello Johnv.

How can a word change scripture if the word is scripture? Which scripture? "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."? If yes are you saying that because I believe God hated Esau I change the scripture? What I am doing is challenging your error not scripture.

And the Word is God. He likes to communicate with his children and does so. I'm working class and uneducated what has Greek to do down here? We can speak our own language though and so God uses that to talk to me because I'm a peon.

Yes and? How many words for hate is there? Does any of the loves ever equal a hate? Does any of the words for hate ever equal love? Is good bad and bad good? Woe to you when man says hate is love.

What I refuse to do is turn hate into love to suit my own doctrine. Is that my false assumption? That I have assumed to believe God? So let it be. "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

So yes if I believe what the bible says and not you I call God a liar. Wow man! Show me where you think He lied please. In the English or the Hebrew. But in one you have said He has lied. Make it simple.

This if I am not mistaken is a gross attack against scripture. I believe that hate means hate not love and for that I gladly call God a liar if that is what you want. I'll leave it for others to judge me.

Infantile maybe better infantile than to try to leads another away from the truth with nothing to back you up but your word that hate means love. I might be simple but I am not stupid. You claim a basic understanding of these languages yet set yourself above those God chose to translate His word. I will believe them. You did not give me a list of the bibles that has, "as it is written: "Jacob I loved Esau I loved less.", in.

What's scriptural grammar discernment mean?

john.

 

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]We are also told in Hosea 4:17 Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone. A terrible indictment.

Ephraim represented the Northern Kingdom that went into Captivity in about 722 BC. What became of them?

 

Unfortunately, you are demonstrating single-translation-onlyism, which is a false doctrine. Your understanding of thise verse is based on a false assumption.

Your ignorance is by choice. You choose to believe a falsehood to support your own preconceptiion, rather than believe the truth and admit a mistake. Typical single-translation-onlyist stance.

Just the opposite. You refuse to increase your understanding of scripture so that you can continue to suit yoru own doctrine.

Your ignorance is so obvious, it's rather sad. And what's worse, is that it's ignorance by choice. Choose to believe an error in order to preserve one's own pride. How unscriptural.

Actually, it you who claims God lied by insisting that what He said in the TR is not what he really said.

No, it's a gross attack against the false doctrine of single-translation-onlyism.

Hmmm, a KJVOist is accusing me of doing what KJVOists do as a matter of standard practice. Amusing.

Having an understanding of what scripture means, as opposed to what is meaning is implied by translation from one language to another (in this case, from the Hebrew fo the TR to 17th century English).

 

Hello Johnv.

What is the TR?

You are in error squire I am an NIVist and leave ye olde English to my poetic brothers. I'm working class and I don't speak ye olde English nor have I much time for beating about the bush.

Preconceptions? How can one have a preconception of the word hate meaning hate? Is that a preconception? It's amazing that's what it is.
Where you coming from? Why do you dislike this fact so much? What causes a person to want to change scripture then try to convert others to his belief while saying that a person that believes in the scriptures is calling God a liar because of a reason I have not heard yet. What's going on? Where has this darkness come from?

I might if I had to!

It's not unscriptural loads of people did it.

Straining towards the finishing line has suddenly taken on new light!
I don't even know what the TR is are let alone disagree with it. I may disagree with it but who knows, I don't?

I see. So you are saying that if I came out of my self-imposed ignorance I would be able to understand that hate means love? I think I shall stay in ignorance because ignorance in this case is bliss.

You did not give me a list of the bibles that has, "as it is written: "Jacob I loved Esau I loved less.", in. Please.

john.

 

The Textus Receptus. It's the Hebrew Old Testament that the AV1611 translators used when translating the OT into the English of their day.

One's class is irrelevant. I'm working class as well. I don't buy the "I'm an idiot, therefore I don't need to study scripture" arguement.

You didn't even know what the TR was. That's Bible Study 101, dude.

SInce when does loads of people doing something make something scriptural?

Scrupture says the truth shall set you free. It does not say ignorance will set you free. The Hebrew context of the verse in question is the scriptural truth. That is indisputable.

It is so in the Hebrew OT. That's difinitive.

 

Hello Johnv.

Class is relevant as it determines education. I did not say I was an idiot I said I wasn't stupid. Your education has caused you to believe that you are able to turn the word 'hate' into meaning love. There is only one e in argument.
It is not me that said I do not need to study scripture but you saying I did.

The Textus Receptus, I know it as the received text.

I do now. So I'm as clever at that point now as you are.

Bible Study 101, dude is not a phrase I am familiar with. I have seen it once or twice but I can only guess that you mean this is the basics. The 101 I know of is a room where your worse fears are realised. 1984. I won't assume more.

We all bring preconceptions to the word of God. I had the preconceived idea that words actually meant something and that words do not change their meanings so black becomes white.

Are you saying there will be no ignorants saved? Must one be educated to be saved? Blessed are the middle classes.

Not according to the translators of the KJV and NIV.
"as it is written: "Jacob I loved Esau I loved less." Does not appear in those two translations and as you say it is most definitly in the Hebrew that Jacob I loved Esau I loved less then what? Since you have given me no translation that has 'Jacob I loved Esau I loved less' then I shall assume there is none. Now you want me to go against God's providence for me? No way man. He loves me and He wants me to know Him and since He did not see fit to teach me Hebrew I must believe in the English whether that is modern or olde worldy English.
I will not stand before Him trying to explain why I did not trust Him.

If that is the only evidence you have then you lose because Romans is it's own context. What He thought of the unborn Esau He did to Pharaoh!

Without Esau being hated and Pharaoh making up his own mind and God kidding us on that He has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden, bit hard to see why anyone would have the temerity to suggest someone might ask why God still blames us. Paul didn't know about this love hate thing did He? Being a Jew and all. Do the NT writers quote the Septuagint? What's that say?

john.

 

Say, I've never heard it just like that before

Sounds pretty convincing

 

Does it? I'm working class, same as you.

Not at all. My education has equipped me with discernmentof what is true instead of what is presumed. You are fully capable of engaging in that same discernment. But you choose to refrain, preferring to adhere to an assumption, instead of what is true.

You'd be wrong. Word meaning change all the time. And, in the case of the aforementioned verse, the word "hate", without taking into consideration the Hebraic context, is not the best translation. The Received Text does not say "hate" in accordance with your definition. It says "love less" in accordance with your definition.

I wasn't discussing salvation at all. I was discussing the need to have an accurate understanding.

You're assuming incorrectly, as I said before, that the definition of "hate" is the withholding of love. That's not the definition of hate. You're inserting that definition into scripture. Now, to answer your question, Esau was loves less than Jacob.

The topic of trusting in Him is a separate issue from comprehension of scripture. You're choosing to not comprehend scripture. I never questioned your trust in the Lord.

Actually, YOU lose according to John 3:16, because it's clear that God's love did not exclude anyone in the world.

 

Hello Johnv.

Class is relevant as it determines education.

Not the same as me surely? You are at the heart of empire you can't be working class because you have to work. That would make the upper class working class.
Come on wise guy and show me how working class you are. You are a peon? If you are then you are at least a brother of the flesh and you will embrace me because of the prejudice. Or you are not working class. We have identity. We know each other.

Your education has caused you to believe that you are able to turn the word 'hate' into meaning love.

If your education is what has lead you to believe that black is white and hate is love I should take your education back to it's makers because it is not worth much in real land. HaHa!. Good is bad and bad is good and hate is not hate.

Believe it or not my education came from science fiction. I spent a lot of time in science fantasy so fantasy has it's place but reality is real.

First time I've been accused of believing scripture I'm sure. That's funny. HaHa!
We all bring preconceptions to the word of God. I had the preconceived idea that words actually meant something and that words do not change their meanings so black becomes white.

Words have a tendency to shift over time but not all the time. As if hate meant hate yesterday but today it means love! I said I'm not stupid.
Ok, you want me to believe what you say just show me one translation that says what you want it to say and I will enter into serious contention with it. Until then you are game.

Not for you but for me it is the very glory of God. This is what you argue against. It is not a side issue but deals with the Sovereignty of God. If a man chooses the man is soverign. God is Soverign be told. That is not up for question.

Show me a translation that says what you say and you might stand a chance but as for me and my house, God is Sovereign. He gives understanding.

How you choose to use the word is up to God. As for me, if God wanted me to believe that He loved Esau less, which by the way is a total disregard for the word 'love', if He loved Esau less then He should have flipping said so shouldn't He? I mean if God wanted to get across the message that He loved Esau then He would have been a bit wiser than tell me He hated Him! I'm not stupid! I said so.

For what then? You can gain salvation then? Tell us how please so we don't have to rely on Him.

It's what I have said. Hate is a decision where is the conflict?

And that could sound right but it is in error. Love never, get the word? Never. It means never by the way and it is used in connection with love and that never fails. Love is not if it fails. God is love.

Another direct assault on the word of God. Spell out what you mean. Tell us what you believe.

I'm sorry to be so cloddy but hatred seems to negate love somehow don't know how but it does. I comprehend that God hates Esau. I comprehend that you say He don't. I see a conflict. I see a man saying something opposite to scripture and I choose to believe God not you and you say I don't comprehend? A merry jest I take it? Nice one son.

I read that God hated Esau. Others read to. You are telling me He did not hate Esau. I trust that God has told this peon that He hated Esau but you say He did not. I say I believe what what God has told me I couldn't care less what you think.

Ah yea man have you met my mate Eli? I love this bloke Eli. My brother in grace. 1 Sam 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' "
Saves so much thinking! It shows that no atonement was given for the house of Eli so that is limited atonement in your face.

JN JN 17:13 "I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them. 14 I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world. 15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. 17 Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. 19 For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified.

So you say.

john.

 

Sorry,
But the Received Text was Greek manusript work for the NEW TESTAMENT.

The Old Testament was the Masoretic text.

 

And Scrivener and all other scholars agree that the RECEIVED TEXT says it is "hated". Not loved less.
In the Novum Testamentum it is rendered
to HATE.
And in the Masoretic text for Mal 1.3 it is to DETEST, to HATE.