P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
My apologies, the OP is Epistemes Not you…but the point is clear anyway.
- Status
B
BRB
Guest
IMO, the scriptures teach that God exhibits BOTH conditional & unconditional fairness and justice towards all.
We are not all created equal … our USA Constitution overstates the truth of matter.
I think 1st Samuel 2:30 gives us insight into how God responds to mankind.
Code:
"the Lord declares: 'Far be it from me; for those who honor me I will honor, and those who despise [dishonor] me shall be lightly esteemed".God has created us all in Unconditional Love. Yet, he looks to those who exhibit Faith in his Laws & in Christ. Those of us who exhibit Faith & Obedience towards our Creator and his Laws [written upon our hearts] … show honor towards him.
Part 2 … Conditional Love:
To the faithful remnant, our Lord awards honors [Rebirth via his Son], and an outpouring of his Conditional Love and entrance into his Eternity Kingdom.
R
roedelbronn
Guest
Huh? Are you a Calvinist? How can any other understanding come from Christ’s teachings? Are you saying that some are unloved by God since birth? …or that God loves them until some point where they sin too much and that love turns to hate and they’re condemned before they die? You claim that God does not love all his people, and I’d be interested in hearing some support from the teachings of Christ and his apostles. Your position seems utterly ridiculous to me. Don’t quote blindly isolated statements from the OT; afterall, if OT passages are not consistent with the teachings of Christ, then obviously the problem lies with understanding the OT passages, not with Christ…
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
Lets look at this in context: (From the DRB)
God is saying here, that because they mis-used their office, and so essentially despised His Commands - they would no longer be Priests for the people of Israel. Not to say that their line of Priests would end, it didn’t - but that their family would not be eligible to participate until it had been cleansed of the unrighteous. Because (I’m guessing here) since it was the whole families guilt - by not speaking up - all would then suffer.
This doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love them just the same…it just means that with spiritual privileges comes responsibilities and obligations. If you screw up - continuously, those who depend on you suffer. Therefore God had to remove them from their post.
It was not conditional Love - But rather out of Love, for them and for all, the He had to act and discipline those who were sinning.
Peace
John
F
fewnotmany
Guest
No, hated before they were even born.(Ro 9:13)
No, my claim is that God loves His Church and gave his life for it (no one else). (Eph 5:21-33)
He hates those that don’t keep his commandments (Psalm 5:5)
Not limited to, but a good place to start: Luke 13:23-30
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
This is not the stance of Church teaching on the verse of Scripture. From everything I have read a clear reading of this is that Isaac was favored to Esau. that the word Hate as we know it today would not be the correct translation.
Yes and all those that decide to enter into his Church. and the invitation is open to all. Also what of those that never had the opportunity to hear the Gospel? under what you said they are damn because they were unlucky enough to have been born in apart of the World yeat not reached by the Gospel.
I will give you as much as that he hate those that turn from his commandments, even those that have never heard them but live a life of vile evilness and contempt.
F
fewnotmany
Guest
Official Church citation please.
Romans 9:13
9:13
Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.”
Hated - Greek word Miseo (mis-eh’-o)
Same word Jesus uses in:
Luke 14:26
"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 16:13
“No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot * serve God and wealth.”
Since you agree with my claim is that God loves His Church and gave his life for it (no one else). (Eph 5:21-33); keeping with the context of the Book of Ephesians, God did the deciding who would enter the Church – not man.
Eph. 1:4
just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love
1:5
He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will
O
oneGODoneCHURCH
Guest
I do not believe in predestination in that every thing about what wr do and who we are and I believe that the Church does not hold to it either. With my limited ability I come to the conclusion that what is meant here is that all are n=known and chosen all have been invited into the Adoption of God. Not all will chose to enter.
N
nuntym
Guest
You do know, fewnotmany, that you are getting really close to the heresy of Predestinarianism, right?
B
BRB
Guest
This scripture alone doesn’t prove that God has only CONDITIONAL love.
God dispised ESAU … because of his gift to God was not honorable and pleasing.
God loved Esau UNCONDITIONALLY as a child. It was as an adult he erred. His freewill was misused towards God.
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
**(First of all, in Semetic language, ‘Hate’ means to love less. miseō
mis-eh’-o
From a primary word μῖσος misos (hatred); to detest; by extension to love less: - hate (-ful). Therefore ‘I HATED’ = hateful, rather than Hatred, meaning - to love less.)
**
**
This is True throughout Scripture where the word ‘hate’ is used.**
See also John 8:44.
God here is not saying that some people in the world are condemned from the beginning - no. He is speaking to the reality that the offspring of both Cain and Seth were present in the world - right up to this very day. The bloodline of Seth must be kept pure, which is why, if you were to read just one line above your reference, it states “The older shall serve the younger”. Meaning, the older shall be subject to the younger, and therefore less important, ‘Loved less’. In order to get the full meaning and implication of Jacob and Esau - you need to study the O.T. and review the genealogy.
This is not a matter of God picking and choosing on a whim who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, it is more a matter of genetics, and Gods choice concerning the part those who are likely to fail will play in the responsibilities in the Service of God. Which was illustrated before to you in I Samuel 29-30.
You must take Scripture in context, and as a whole before passing Judgment on God. Cherry picking verses leads to confusion and dangerous conclusions. David Koresh comes to mind as well as Charles Manson, Saddam Hussein, and the 10’s of thousands of Protestant Denominations.
To be continued
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
.
Meaning He disciplines those whom He loves - which is everyone. As was shown to you before.
To be continued
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
Again, what is stated here is the Cost of being a Disciple - not that we should go out and shoot those who refuse Him. How can your statement be True if Jesus also said right in those same passages you used for reference
Are we then supposed to condemn ourselves in order to then “Go and teach all nations…” (paraphrased)
Ridiculous. What God expects is Fidelity - not someone who comes and goes. Calling to God to get us out of a situation, and then dismissing Him - as people not only are prone to do with family and friends, but themselves as well. Such as, when you get sick you take care of yourself, but when you get better - go back to doing your habitual things again for example “the morning after the night before.”
What He expects is taken from your own references:
That does not mean that you are automatically condemned - it means you must prove you can be faithful, or at least try to be faithful, with the words which are already inscribed on your heart, before you are trusted with the greatest wealth - the Holy Spirit. Because if you resist and reject the Holy Spirit - then you are condemned. Because what you have then done is rejected God - by your own choice, and condemned yourself.
Peace
John
F
fewnotmany
Guest
Anyway you take the hate and sugar coat it into love less, the result for Essau remains the same, he lost his birthright.
My reference to Luke 13:23-30 was to point out the conditions to being a follower of Christ. Also, the citation was to point out that the word hate is not limited to Rom 9:13. Please note that I don’t agree with the inference that you made; and I placed in Bold print.
What does Luke 14:26 mean to you?
P
PraRFLEsEkHm
Guest
I hardly think looking at a word for what it really means is ‘suger coating’. It deepens your understanding of Scripture, and clears up misunderstandings, well sometimes anyway. From your own posts:
Post 14:
Post 30:
Esau lost his birthright because he gave it up, and for the reasons I stated.
Yes, which is why I said the same was true throughout Scripture.
If there weren’t conditions - we wouldn’t have free will. Which, I think, is the piece of the puzzle you’re missing. However having conditions to being a disciple - does not mean that there are conditions to Gods Love.
I was being facetious with my inference - but it does help to illustrate my point.
,
If you do not Love God more than the family member who is pleading or threatening to boot you out of the family for not believing as they do, or for believing as you do, or if you do not love your neighbor enough to care about them knowing the Truth - because you yourself rejected it, if you don’t love Him more than yourself - such as standing up under persecution, then by definition - you are not being, and so then you can not be, a disciple of God. At least not until you get your priorities straight. Which is most important - worldly pleasures and the approval of men - or the things of God, and eternal salvation?
Jesus was illustrating the very point of discipleship. You can’t learn and Live the Truth, if you do not pick up your cross and follow Him.
Peace
John
N
nuntym
Guest
Fewnotmany,
I will try to point what seems to me misunderstandings on your part in this issue. I will be disarranging your quotes so that I can make my point clearer.
An example of the use of miseo as “loved less than the other” is Genesis 29:30-31, wherein Jacob acquired two wives, Leah and Rachel:
[30] So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years.
[31]When the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren.
(Genesis 29:30-31, RSV, emphases mine)
To remove all doubts of the use of miseo here, see this.
[37] He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me
Matthew 10:37, RSV
Also, look at Haydock’s commentary on Luke 14:26, which has commentaries by the Church Fathers, but which you, fewnotmany, have ignored in another thread:
Ver. 26. Hate not, &c. The law of Christ does not allow us to hate even our enemies, much less our parents: but the meaning of the text is, that we must be in that disposition of soul so as to be willing to renounce and part with every thing, how near or dear soever it may be to us, that would keep us from following Christ. (Challoner) — The word hate is not to be taken in its proper sense, but to be expounded by the words of Christ, (Matthew x. 37.) that no man must love his father more than God, &c. (Witham) — Christ wishes to shew us what dispositions are necessary in him who desires to become his disciple; (Theophylactus) and to teach us that we must not be discouraged, if we meet with many hardships and labours in our journey to our heavenly country. (St. Gregory) — And if for our sakes, Christ even renounced his own mother, saying, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? why do you wish to be treated more delicately than your Lord? (St. Ambrose) — He wished also to demonstrate to us, that the hatred he here inculcates, is not to proceed from any disaffection towards our parents, but from charity for ourselves; for immediately he adds, and his own life also. From which words it is evident, that in our love we must hate our brethren as we do ourselves.
[21]Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.
[22] Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.
[23] For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
[24] As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
[25] Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
[26] that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
[27] that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
[28] Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
[29] For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church,
[30] because we are members of his body.
[31] “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
[32] This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;
[33] however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Ephesians 5:21-33, RSV
Besides, read what Jesus himself said on prophesying his death:
[32] (Jesus said,) “and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.”
John 13:32, RSV, emphasis mine
Also, read St. Paul’s words:
[17] If, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
[18] Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.
Romans 5:17-18, RSV, emphasis mine
And again by St. Paul:
[1] First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men,
[2] for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.
[3] This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
[4] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1 Timothy 2:1-4, RSV, emphasis mine
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
851 Missionary motivation. It is from God’s love for all men that the Church in every age receives both the obligation and the vigor of her missionary dynamism, “for the love of Christ urges us on.” Indeed, God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"; that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who obey the prompting of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted, must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth. Because she believes in God’s universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary.
Source, emphases mine
(continued at next post)
I will try to point what seems to me misunderstandings on your part in this issue. I will be disarranging your quotes so that I can make my point clearer.
In actuality, the use of miseo in the Bible has a whole range of meanings from “loved less than the other” to “truly hated, abhorred.”
An example of the use of miseo as “loved less than the other” is Genesis 29:30-31, wherein Jacob acquired two wives, Leah and Rachel:
[30] So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years.
[31]When the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb; but Rachel was barren.
(Genesis 29:30-31, RSV, emphases mine)
To remove all doubts of the use of miseo here, see this.
See the parallel quote of this in Matthew, and make your judgement:
[37] He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me
Matthew 10:37, RSV
Also, look at Haydock’s commentary on Luke 14:26, which has commentaries by the Church Fathers, but which you, fewnotmany, have ignored in another thread:
Ver. 26. Hate not, &c. The law of Christ does not allow us to hate even our enemies, much less our parents: but the meaning of the text is, that we must be in that disposition of soul so as to be willing to renounce and part with every thing, how near or dear soever it may be to us, that would keep us from following Christ. (Challoner) — The word hate is not to be taken in its proper sense, but to be expounded by the words of Christ, (Matthew x. 37.) that no man must love his father more than God, &c. (Witham) — Christ wishes to shew us what dispositions are necessary in him who desires to become his disciple; (Theophylactus) and to teach us that we must not be discouraged, if we meet with many hardships and labours in our journey to our heavenly country. (St. Gregory) — And if for our sakes, Christ even renounced his own mother, saying, Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? why do you wish to be treated more delicately than your Lord? (St. Ambrose) — He wished also to demonstrate to us, that the hatred he here inculcates, is not to proceed from any disaffection towards our parents, but from charity for ourselves; for immediately he adds, and his own life also. From which words it is evident, that in our love we must hate our brethren as we do ourselves.
On reading Ephesians 5:21-33, I did not see any inference to what you are talking about:
[21]Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.
[22] Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.
[23] For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
[24] As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
[25] Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
[26] that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
[27] that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
[28] Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.
[29] For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church,
[30] because we are members of his body.
[31] “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”
[32] This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church;
[33] however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
Ephesians 5:21-33, RSV
Besides, read what Jesus himself said on prophesying his death:
[32] (Jesus said,) “and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.”
John 13:32, RSV, emphasis mine
Also, read St. Paul’s words:
[17] If, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
[18] Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.
Romans 5:17-18, RSV, emphasis mine
And again by St. Paul:
[1] First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men,
[2] for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.
[3] This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
[4] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1 Timothy 2:1-4, RSV, emphasis mine
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
851 Missionary motivation. It is from God’s love for all men that the Church in every age receives both the obligation and the vigor of her missionary dynamism, “for the love of Christ urges us on.” Indeed, God "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"; that is, God wills the salvation of everyone through the knowledge of the truth. Salvation is found in the truth. Those who obey the prompting of the Spirit of truth are already on the way of salvation. But the Church, to whom this truth has been entrusted, must go out to meet their desire, so as to bring them the truth. Because she believes in God’s universal plan of salvation, the Church must be missionary.
Source, emphases mine
(continued at next post)
N
nuntym
Guest
St. Paul in Romans 9:13 quoted Malachi:
[1] The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel by Mal’achi.
[2] “I have loved you,” says the LORD. But you say, “How hast thou loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” says the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob
[3] but I have hated Esau; I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.”
Malachi 1:1-3, RSV
And Malachi is referring to the episode of Jacob and Esau in Genesis:
[21] And Isaac prayed to the LORD for his wife, because she was barren; and the LORD granted his prayer, and Rebekah his wife conceived.
[22] The children struggled together within her; and she said, “If it is thus, why do I live?” So she went to inquire of the LORD.
[23] And the LORD said to her, “Two nations are in your womb,
and two peoples, born of you, shall be divided;
the one shall be stronger than the other,
the elder shall serve the younger.”
[24] When her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.
[25] The first came forth red, all his body like a hairy mantle; so they called his name Esau.
[26] Afterward his brother came forth, and his hand had taken hold of Esau’s heel; so his name was called Jacob. Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them.
[27] When the boys grew up, Esau was a skilful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents.
[28] Isaac loved Esau, because he ate of his game; but Rebekah loved Jacob.
[29] Once when Jacob was boiling pottage, Esau came in from the field, and he was famished.
[30] And Esau said to Jacob, “Let me eat some of that red pottage, for I am famished!” (Therefore his name was called Edom.)
[31] Jacob said, “First sell me your birthright.”
[32] Esau said, “I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?”
[33] Jacob said, “Swear to me first.” So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.
[34] Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentils, and he ate and drank, and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.
Genesis 25:21-34, RSV
Nowhere does it say that God hated Esau before he was born. Indeed, even when the Lord foreknew what Esau was going to do, he gave Esau more skills that Jacob, and Esau had the birthright to his father’s blessing as the firstborn: a sign that God’s love is unconditional. But Esau exchanged his birthright for a measly dish of pottage, and therefore God gave him what he wanted: through their mother’s wiles, Jacob acquired Esau’s “despised” birthright (Genesis 27); in reading the whole story, one would infer that if Esau did not give his birthright to Jacob in so callous a way, then God would have made all efforts of Rebeccah and Jacob to acquire Esau’s birthright to naught (Proverbs 19:21)
Yes, Esau lost his birthright, but of his own choice, not because God hated Esau from the beginning. God’s Unconditional Love is to point of accepting what any man wants, even if it is to his own detriment. From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: “He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren. To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.
Source, emphases mine
And thus God will hate those who hate Him, for it is the decree of His Unconditional Love to give us what we want.
And thus we come to predestination:
Again as I was saying before, you are coming very very close to the heresy of Predestinarianism, which “reduces the eternal salvation of the elect as well as the eternal damnation of the reprobate to one cause alone, namely to the sovereign will of God, and thereby excludes the free co-operation of man as a secondary factor in bringing about a happy or unhappy future in the life to come.”
But there IS such a thing as Predestination, which teaches that everything that happens in this universe happens with God’s permission, yet does NOT contradict God’s Divine Unconditional Love. How all the seeming inequality of fates in the world coincides with God’s Divine Love is a mystery:
In order to emphasize how mysterious and unapproachable is Divine election, the Council of Trent calls predestination “hidden mystery”. That predestination is indeed a sublime mystery appears not only from the fact that the depths of the eternal counsel cannot be fathomed, it is even externally visible in the inequality of the Divine choice. The unequal standard by which baptismal grace is distributed among infants and efficacious graces among adults is hidden from our view by an impenetrable veil. Could we gain a glimpse at the reasons of this inequality, we should at once hold the key to the solution of the mystery itself. Why is it that this child is baptized, but not the child of the neighbour? Why is it that Peter the Apostle rose again after his fall and persevered till his death, while Judas Iscariot, his fellow-Apostle, hanged himself and thus frustrated his salvation? Though correct, the answer that Judas went to perdition of his own free will, while Peter faithfully co-operated with the grace of conversion offered him, does not clear up the enigma. For the question recurs: Why did not God give to Judas the same efficacious, infallibly successful grace of conversion as to St. Peter, whose blasphemous denial of the Lord was a sin no less grievous than that of the traitor Judas? To all these and similar questions the only reasonable reply is the word of St. Augustine: “Inscrutabilia sunt judicia Dei” (the judgments of God are inscrutable).
Source
I have tried to use official Church citations (the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church) as well as reputable Catholic sources (the Catholic Encyclopedia, Haydock’s commentary) to try to support the Church’s teaching that God’s Love is unconditional.
What is/are the official Church citation/s that teaches God’s “conditional” love, fewnotmany?
Z
zalo
Guest
"The doctor doesn’t hate an amputees’ leg, but he must cut it off to prevent the spreading of disease. From a certain point of view, someone might say that the doctor hates the leg, though. "
Douglas, this kind of reasoning is behind all big massacres in history: did Stalin hate his opponents (which he dubbed “enemies of the people”)? No, not at all, he was merely trying to save the people, and the revolution and blah blah blah…so he, like your doctor, simply had to “cut them off”, which means that he killed 30 million human beings. Did Hitler hate the Jews? No, not at all, he was just trying to save the good German people, so he had to cut the Jews off…the same can be said about any other dictator throughout history. So here you go.
Douglas, this kind of reasoning is behind all big massacres in history: did Stalin hate his opponents (which he dubbed “enemies of the people”)? No, not at all, he was merely trying to save the people, and the revolution and blah blah blah…so he, like your doctor, simply had to “cut them off”, which means that he killed 30 million human beings. Did Hitler hate the Jews? No, not at all, he was just trying to save the good German people, so he had to cut the Jews off…the same can be said about any other dictator throughout history. So here you go.
B
BRB
Guest
Nuntym … good points, good apologetics
- Status