Butt out...

[John317]

Revelation says nothing about the "doctrines" of the Nicolaitans.

God hates the Nicolaitans. That is what Revelation says.

Revelation clearly says that God hates the deeds and the false teachings of the Nicolaitans.

Read the texts:

Rev. 2:6

Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Rev. 2:15

So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

[Lysimachus]

Revelation clearly says that God hates the deeds and the false teachings of the Nicolaitans.

Read the texts:

Rev. 2:6

Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Rev. 2:15

So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

This should bring Miz3 to his knees. But sadly, his pride will not let him.

[John317]

....God does indeed have hatred for particular individuals.

For what individuals does God have hatred?

The Bible does say, "Jacob I loved but Esau I hated," but that means God preferred Jacob. It doesn't mean God actually hated Esau. Jesus Christ died to save Esau and his descendants. Esau is among those referred to in John 3: 16 whom the Lord loves.

Malachi 1:2-3

"I have loved you," says the Lord. But you say, "How have you loved us?" "Is not Esau Jacob's brother?" declares the Lord. "Yet I have loved Jacob [3] but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert."

[John317]

[John317]

Reread the Book of Revelation it is filled with hatred and states so explicitly.

For example:

"But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate."

Revelation 2:6.

I would say that is quite clear and a certainty that God hates and the Book of Revelation is filled with hatred toward somethings.

Yes, hatred toward some things. Notice "things," NOT people.

So you are right that God hates sin and false teachings that lead people to be lost. But God doesn't hate individuals. He doesn't hate the popes. God sent Jesus into the world to die for individual popes. But God hates the papal system. He hates false doctrine wherever it is found.

[John317]

Some claim that since the Bible says the man of sin will take his seat "in the temple of God," it can't be referring to the papacy because the pope is in the church, not the temple. See 2 Thess. 2: 4.

However, consider the following from Barnes' commentary:

"Sitteth in the temple of God" - That is, in the Christian church. It is by no means necessary to understand this of the temple at Jerusalem, which was standing at the time this Epistle was written, because the phrase "the temple of God" is several times used with reference to the Christian church, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 3:17; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12.

Quote:

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Who opposeth - That is, he is distinguished as an opposer of the great system which God has revealed for human salvation, and of those who would serve God in purity in the gospel of his Son. No Protestant will doubt that this has been the character of the papacy. The opposition of the general system to the gospel; the persecution of Wycliffe, of John Huss, of Jerome of Prague, of the Waldenses and the Reformers; the Inquisition, the cruelties in the reign of Mary (Queen of Scots), and the massacre of Bartholomew in France, are obvious illustrations of this.

And exalteth himself above all that is called God - That is, whether among the pagans or the Jews; above a false God, or the true God. This could be true only of one who set aside the divine laws; who undertook to legislate where God only has a right to legislate, and whose legislation was contrary to that of God. Any claim of a dominion over conscience; or any arrangement to set aside the divine laws, and to render them nugatory, would correspond with what is implied in this description. It cannot be supposed that any one would openly claim to be superior to God, but the sense must be, that the enactments and ordinances of the "man of sin" would pertain to the province in which God only can legislate, and that the ordinances made by him would be such as to render nugatory the divine laws, by appointing others in their place. No one can reasonably doubt that all that is here affirmed may be found in the claims of the Pope of Rome. The assumptions of the papacy have related to the following things:

(1) To authority above all the inferior orders of the priesthood - above all pastors, bishops, and primates.

(2) authority above all kings and emperors, "deposing some, and advancing others, obliging them to prostrate themselves before him, to kiss his toe, to hold his stirrup, to wait barefooted at his gate, treading even upon the neck, and kicking off the imperial crown with his foot" - Newton. Thus, Gregory VII made Henry IV wait barefooted at his gate. Thus, Alexander III trod upon the neck of Alexander I. Thus, Celestin kicked off the imperial crown of Henry VI. Thus, the right was claimed, and asserted, of laying nations under interdict, of deposing kings, and of absolving their subjects from their oaths of allegiance. And thus the Pope claimed the right over all unknown lands that might be discovered by Columbus, and apportioned the New World as he pleased - in all these things claiming prerogatives which can pertain only to God.

(3) to authority over the conscience, in matters which can pertain only to God himself, and where he only can legislate. Thus, it has been, and is, one of the claims set up for the Pope that he is infallible. Thus, he "forbids what God has commanded," as the marriage of the clergy, communion in both kinds, the use of the Scriptures for the common people. Thus, he has set aside the second commandment by the appointment of image-worship; and thus he claims the power of the forgiveness of sins. Multitudes of things which Christ allows his people are forbidden by the papacy, and many things are enjoined, or allowed, directly contrary to the divine legislation.

Or that is worshipped - sebasma. This word means "an object of worship;" see Acts 17:3, where it is rendered devotions. It may be applied to the worship of a pagan divinity, or of the true God. "It may refer to a person, an idol, or a place. Probably Paul refers here to the heroes and other subordinate divinities of the heathen mythology" - Oldshausen. No one can doubt that the Pope has claimed higher honors, as the vicegerent of Christ, than was ever rendered in the ancient "hero worship."

So that he, as God - That is, claiming the honors due to God. This expression would not imply that he actually claimed to be the true God, but only that he sits in the temple, and manifests himself as if he were God. He claims such honors and such reverence as the true God would if he should appear in human form. It should be observed here, however, that there is much reason to doubt the genuineness of this phrase - "as God" - ὡς Θεον hōs Theon. Mill supposes that it was inserted from the context. It is marked with an asterisk in the Vulgate, the Coptic, and the Syriac, and is omitted by many of the fathers; see Mill and Wetstein. It is rejected by Griesbach and Lachmann, and marked as doubtful by Hahn. It is defended, however, by Matthaei, Koppe, Knapp, and Schott. The sense is not materially affected whether it be regarded as genuine or not.

Sitteth in the temple of God - That is, in the Christian church. It is by no means necessary to understand this of the temple at Jerusalem, which was standing at the time this Epistle was written, because:

(1) the phrase "the temple of God" is several times used with reference to the Christian church, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 3:17; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:21; Revelation 3:12; and,

(2) the temple was the proper symbol of the church, and an apostle trained amidst the Hebrew institutions would naturally speak of the church as the temple of God. The temple at Jerusalem was regarded as the peculiar dwelling-place of God on earth. When the Christian church was founded, it was spoken of as the peculiar dwelling-place of God; see the passages referred to above. He dwelt among His people. He was with them, and walked with them, and manifested himself among them - as he had done in the ancient temple. The usage in the New Testament would not lead us to restrict this language to an edifice, or a "church," as the word is now commonly used, but rather to suppose that it denotes the church as a society, and the idea is, that the Antichrist here referred to would present himself in the midst of that church as claiming the honors due to God alone.

[skyblue888]

God is no respector of persons. When He says Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated, it simply means that Jacob responded the the Holy Spirit's overtures and Esau did not.

This is the language of Heaven.

sky

[jasd]

>>“We", Seventh-day Adventists, would do well to follow that lead, speak only of historic details which can be easily verified by any scholar.<<

Indeed, my point exactly - rather than indiscriminate, cavalier, or disingenuous slander that is so generally forthcoming. There is much with which to criticize the RCCs without resorting to charges that cannot be substantiated or – more sadly, can be but are ignored that scurrility may be utilized.

>>However, where she DOES list specific details of history that are NOT or cannot be verified, or are even opposed by historic referrences,<<

I provided an example of her use of a charge that was utterly false but was nevertheless used in the GC.

>>I'll take Ellen Whites words over history books.<<

That is the earmark of the cultist and of iconolatry.

>>Not all history is 100% accurate after all.<<

True, however, neither is EGW accurate – as you know, would you value truth.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:John317

It doesn't mean God actually hated Esau. [...]

Malachi 1:2-3

"I have loved you," says the Lord. But you say, "How have you loved us?" "Is not Esau Jacob's brother?" declares the Lord. "Yet I have loved Jacob [3] but Esau I have hated: (#H8130) I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert." [ed.jasd]

Strong’s #H8130; sane’ (Qal stem)

a) (Qal) to hate

1) of man

2) of God

3) hater, one hating, enemy (participle) (subst)

Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated (#G3404).

Strong’s #G3404; miseo

1) to hate, pursue with hatred, detest

2) to be hated, detested

Mebbe, it was that St Paul was simply indulging in a bit of hyperbole, eh?

[ClubV12]

>>I'll take Ellen Whites words over history books.<<

That is the earmark of the cultist and of iconolatry.

No this is the mark of a man who has considered the issue carefully and reached a conclusion on the matter, logically and reasonably. The bible is the inspired word of God to man, as was the work of Ellen White. In both cases, they pass the test's given whereby we may know if they be truth or error.

Most people place their faith in science and history books and philosphers. I place my faith in God over man, as any serious christian would.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

...You are afraid to name those "others" around Ellen White who were given "prophetic utterances" because many even on your side would not agree with your fanaticism. That is why you will not publicly name them here on the forum.

Who are you referring to-- the "others" around Ellen White who were given "prophetic utterances"?

Do you believe those "others" were genuine prophets of God?

It is ClubV12 who believes that contemporaries of Ellen White were also prophets and that Ellen White benefited from their "inspired counsel".

I was merely asking ClubV12 to name these "others". At this point in time ClubV12 is too embarrassed to name them.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: John317

Revelation clearly says that God hates the deeds and the false teachings of the Nicolaitans.

Read the texts:

Rev. 2:6

Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Rev. 2:15

So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.

This should bring Miz3 to his knees. But sadly, his pride will not let him.

You missed by apology in regard to that I was wrong on this particular point about the Nicolaitans. Go back and read the exchange again.

[ClubV12]

The definition of "prophet" remains illusive. Certainly Ellen White was one. But what of men, or women, who have a singular divine revelation from God? Are they to considered "prophets" or to a lesser degree, a man or woman "of God".

Your young men shall have visions, your old men shall dream dreams. Are these also considered "prophets" as a result?

Think about it:

Is there ANYBODY during Ellen Whites lifetime that we know of from recorded history of those times that "had visions or dreamed dreams" (had some kind of divine revelation) AND were brought to the attention of Ellen White who CONFIRMED their divine revelation?

This should be easy for those who are students of Ellen White history! :)

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

....God does indeed have hatred for particular individuals.

For what individuals does God have hatred?

The Bible does say, "Jacob I loved but Esau I hated," but that means God preferred Jacob. It doesn't mean God actually hated Esau. Jesus Christ died to save Esau and his descendants. Esau is among those referred to in John 3: 16 whom the Lord loves.

Malachi 1:2-3

"I have loved you," says the Lord. But you say, "How have you loved us?" "Is not Esau Jacob's brother?" declares the Lord. "Yet I have loved Jacob [3] but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert."

Try these texts:

1. Psalm 11:5

"The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked and those who love violence his soul hates."

I believe this explicitly states that God hates the wicked, the wicked human entity. This alone proves you wrong.

2. Proverbs 6:16-19.

"There are six things the LORD hates,

seven that are detestable to him:

17 haughty eyes,

a lying tongue,

hands that shed innocent blood,

18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,

feet that are quick to rush into evil,

19 a false witness who pours out lies

and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers."

Let's see God hates eyes, tongue, hands, heart, feet, that do evil. In addition God hates the "human who is a false witness". The whole human person. Also, God hates the "man" who stirs up dissension with other humans.

So God indeed does HATE THE HUMAN AS A WHOLE ENTITY.

3. Jeremiah 12:8.

"My inheritance has become to me like a lion in the forest. She roars at me; therefore I hate her."

Clear Word that God hates Israel (His inheritance), THAT IS HUMANS.

4. Hosea 9:15.

"Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal, I hated them there. Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious."

Again, God is stating that He hates the persons of Israel. That God HATES HUMANS.

5. Malachi 1:2-3.

"I have loved you,” says the LORD.

“But you ask, ‘How have you loved us?’

“Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” the LORD says. “Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals."

You state that God is not talking about Esau the person. Ok, lets give you that. However, God is talking about "human people" that He hates. God is stating that He hates every man, woman, child, and little tiny baby of the Esauites. That is each individual of that group God hates. They are "individual humans".

6. Romans 9:13

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

Let's say again for your sake that this is not talking about the very person of Esau. Ok, we give you that again. Now reread the notes on Malachi chapter one above and see again that we are still talking about God hating humans including little tiny babies and those still in the womb.

You are clearly wrong because the Bible definitively states that God does indeed hate "humans" as individuals and as groups, regardless God still hates humans.

[skyblue888]

We need to pay more attention to these words of Jesus, "How readest thou?"

Not only do our eyes need to be anointed but our ears also.

When God says that He hardens the heart, like the heart of Pharaoh, it means something but not what we think it means. If you try to help me see a mistake I have made and you do it with love and compassion, and yet I resent you for it, you have hardened my heart. But no man is going to accuse you of having hardened my heart.

However the Lord would have us understand that God hardens the hearts of men by sending them light to correct their errors and to lead them in safe paths if that light is resisted.

God gave to Jacob and to Esau the same opportunites. Esau responded to the influence of the Holy Spirit and his heart was softened but Esau's heart was hardened because he kicked against the pricks. God describes His loving actions on both men in these words: "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated."

"How readest thou?"

sky

[joeb]

Try these texts:

1. Psalm 11:5

"The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked and those who love violence his soul hates."

I believe this explicitly states that God hates the wicked, the wicked human entity. This alone proves you wrong.

2. Proverbs 6:16-19.

"There are six things the LORD hates,

seven that are detestable to him:

17 haughty eyes,

a lying tongue,

hands that shed innocent blood,

18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,

feet that are quick to rush into evil,

19 a false witness who pours out lies

and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers."

Let's see God hates eyes, tongue, hands, heart, feet, that do evil. In addition God hates the "human who is a false witness". The whole human person. Also, God hates the "man" who stirs up dissension with other humans.

So God indeed does HATE THE HUMAN AS A WHOLE ENTITY.

3. Jeremiah 12:8.

"My inheritance has become to me like a lion in the forest. She roars at me; therefore I hate her."

Clear Word that God hates Israel (His inheritance), THAT IS HUMANS.

4. Hosea 9:15.

"Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal, I hated them there. Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious."

Again, God is stating that He hates the persons of Israel. That God HATES HUMANS.

5. Malachi 1:2-3.

"I have loved you,” says the LORD.

“But you ask, ‘How have you loved us?’

“Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” the LORD says. “Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals."

You state that God is not talking about Esau the person. Ok, lets give you that. However, God is talking about "human people" that He hates. God is stating that He hates every man, woman, child, and little tiny baby of the Esauites. That is each individual of that group God hates. They are "individual humans".

6. Romans 9:13

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

Let's say again for your sake that this is not talking about the very person of Esau. Ok, we give you that again. Now reread the notes on Malachi chapter one above and see again that we are still talking about God hating humans including little tiny babies and those still in the womb.

You are clearly wrong because the Bible definitively states that God does indeed hate "humans" as individuals and as groups, regardless God still hates humans.

I just find your argument flawed on a very basic level. We have all been in rebellion against God and fit the description of those in the texts you quoted. Why then did God save us if He hated us for we have all sinned against Him just as those in your proof texts?

We, all of us humans, are children of God. He created every one of us. He loved us enough to die for all of us, not just some of us. (John 3:16) To then say He hates some of us who rebelled against Him just like the rest of did, is quite at odds with His character.

It is also very much at odds with the character of Jesus. He displayed hatred of no one, and He is God, undeniably. Jesus said, if you've seen me, you've seen the Father so I see no hatred expressed by God even under the most severe abuse.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Notice anything? The appelations of both the Father and Son are given to the same individual. Yet you say one hates certain people, and the other never expressed any hatred toward anyone, even when He was being crucified. How is that possible when the Son says He and His Father are one?

Something rings very false about your position to me.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:ClubV12

I'll take Ellen Whites words over history books.

Quote:jasd

That is the earmark of the cultist and of iconolatry.

>>No this is the mark of a man who has considered the issue carefully and reached a conclusion on the matter, logically and reasonably.<<

Okay, Hoo-yah! It follows that you then allow others of other .orgs their own “carefully” arrived-at conclusions, yes?

>>The bible is the inspired word of God to man, as was the work of Ellen White.<<

Well, yes, Writ is Writ; however, EGW?—the jury has left the building...

I’ve just provided you with an egregious error which was incorporated into the GC. How can you still insist upon ‘inspiration’?

>>In both cases, they pass the test's given whereby we may know if they be truth or error.<<

Uhhh, okay...

>>Most people place their faith in science and history books and philosphers. I place my faith in God over man, as any serious christian would.<<

That’s good, however, Biblically speaking, “faith” and 'hearing' kinda goes hand in hand, yes? I mean, one may believe anything one may wish – for what that serves.

[jasd]

>>The definition of "prophet" remains illusive.<<

Indeed, Leslie Hardinge purports three Biblical definitions of a prophet.

>>Certainly Ellen White was one.<<

Was she?—other than by self-ascription?—and certain hysterical assertions of others...

>>But what of men, or women, who have a singular divine revelation from God? Are they to considered "prophets" or to a lesser degree, a man or woman "of God".<<

I guess that even an interpreter of tongues may be considered a prophet...

>>Your young men shall have visions, your old men shall dream dreams. Are these also considered "prophets" as a result?<<

I am old and dream dreams. Does not a prophet make me – unless and until Gd gives me dreams of import and prophecy. However, I am not the litmus and whatever the nature of my dreams may be, they do not discount the rest of Joel 2.

>>Think about it:

Is there ANYBODY during Ellen Whites lifetime that we know of from recorded history of those times that "had visions or dreamed dreams" (had some kind of divine revelation) AND were brought to the attention of Ellen White who CONFIRMED their divine revelation?<<

Help me out: who was the woman who came to EGW with a prophetic dream, which same was summarily dismissed by EGW? Queen Bee syndrome?

>>This should be easy for those who are students of Ellen White history! <<

Attempting to prove or disprove ‘self-attestation’ is like trying to prove a negative.

[jasd]

>>God gave to Jacob and to Esau the same opportunites. Esau responded to the influence of the Holy Spirit and his heart was softened but Esau's heart was hardened because he kicked against the pricks. God describes His loving actions on both men in these words: "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated."

"How readest thou?"

Rom 9:11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

In other words: ‘whilst still in the womb’

Rom 9:15 ...I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

I read that – Gd is Gd, doing as He wishes. His purposes are beyond our understanding.

[miz3]

We need to pay more attention to these words of Jesus, "How readest thou?"

Not only do our eyes need to be anointed but our ears also.

When God says that He hardens the heart, like the heart of Pharaoh, it means something but not what we think it means. If you try to help me see a mistake I have made and you do it with love and compassion, and yet I resent you for it, you have hardened my heart. But no man is going to accuse you of having hardened my heart.

However the Lord would have us understand that God hardens the hearts of men by sending them light to correct their errors and to lead them in safe paths if that light is resisted.

God gave to Jacob and to Esau the same opportunites. Esau responded to the influence of the Holy Spirit and his heart was softened but Esau's heart was hardened because he kicked against the pricks. God describes His loving actions on both men in these words: "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated."

"How readest thou?"

sky

This is just human logic but it is not what the Bible actually says.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Try these texts:

1. Psalm 11:5

"The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked and those who love violence his soul hates."

I believe this explicitly states that God hates the wicked, the wicked human entity. This alone proves you wrong.

2. Proverbs 6:16-19.

"There are six things the LORD hates,

seven that are detestable to him:

17 haughty eyes,

a lying tongue,

hands that shed innocent blood,

18 a heart that devises wicked schemes,

feet that are quick to rush into evil,

19 a false witness who pours out lies

and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers."

Let's see God hates eyes, tongue, hands, heart, feet, that do evil. In addition God hates the "human who is a false witness". The whole human person. Also, God hates the "man" who stirs up dissension with other humans.

So God indeed does HATE THE HUMAN AS A WHOLE ENTITY.

3. Jeremiah 12:8.

"My inheritance has become to me like a lion in the forest. She roars at me; therefore I hate her."

Clear Word that God hates Israel (His inheritance), THAT IS HUMANS.

4. Hosea 9:15.

"Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal, I hated them there. Because of their sinful deeds, I will drive them out of my house. I will no longer love them; all their leaders are rebellious."

Again, God is stating that He hates the persons of Israel. That God HATES HUMANS.

5. Malachi 1:2-3.

"I have loved you,” says the LORD.

“But you ask, ‘How have you loved us?’

“Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?” the LORD says. “Yet I have loved Jacob, 3 but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals."

You state that God is not talking about Esau the person. Ok, lets give you that. However, God is talking about "human people" that He hates. God is stating that He hates every man, woman, child, and little tiny baby of the Esauites. That is each individual of that group God hates. They are "individual humans".

6. Romans 9:13

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

Let's say again for your sake that this is not talking about the very person of Esau. Ok, we give you that again. Now reread the notes on Malachi chapter one above and see again that we are still talking about God hating humans including little tiny babies and those still in the womb.

You are clearly wrong because the Bible definitively states that God does indeed hate "humans" as individuals and as groups, regardless God still hates humans.

I just find your argument flawed on a very basic level. We have all been in rebellion against God and fit the description of those in the texts you quoted. Why then did God save us if He hated us for we have all sinned against Him just as those in your proof texts?

We, all of us humans, are children of God. He created every one of us. He loved us enough to die for all of us, not just some of us. (John 3:16) To then say He hates some of us who rebelled against Him just like the rest of did, is quite at odds with His character.

It is also very much at odds with the character of Jesus. He displayed hatred of no one, and He is God, undeniably. Jesus said, if you've seen me, you've seen the Father so I see no hatred expressed by God even under the most severe abuse.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Notice anything? The appelations of both the Father and Son are given to the same individual. Yet you say one hates certain people, and the other never expressed any hatred toward anyone, even when He was being crucified. How is that possible when the Son says He and His Father are one?

Something rings very false about your position to me.

You are trying to use human logic which does not work. Your logic as a sinful darkened human cannot fully understand God. You must take God at His Word when He says that He hates.....

If seems inconsistent to you that is because you are not able with your sinful puny brain to understand. You think that God cannot love and hate simultaneously. You as a human cannot do that so you think God is unable to that. You think God is puny like you are.

God says nothing is impossible for Him and that is FACT. Thus, God can, unlike you, love and hate simultaneously. You keep trying to "limit" God and make God just as puny as you are.

[miz3]

>>God gave to Jacob and to Esau the same opportunites. Esau responded to the influence of the Holy Spirit and his heart was softened but Esau's heart was hardened because he kicked against the pricks. God describes His loving actions on both men in these words: "Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated."

"How readest thou?"

Rom 9:11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

In other words: ‘whilst still in the womb’

Rom 9:15 ...I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

I read that – Gd is Gd, doing as He wishes. His purposes are beyond our understanding.

Your last lines in raised type is what I have been saying all along.

[joeb]

You are trying to use human logic which does not work. Your logic as a sinful darkened human cannot fully understand God. You must take God at His Word when He says that He hates.....

If seems inconsistent to you that is because you are not able with your sinful puny brain to understand. You think that God cannot love and hate simultaneously. You as a human cannot do that so you think God is unable to that. You think God is puny like you are.

God says nothing is impossible for Him and that is FACT. Thus, God can, unlike you, love and hate simultaneously. You keep trying to "limit" God and make God just as puny as you are.

I'm not limiting God. I'm taking Him at His word as to who He is. His own description of Himself doesn't include hatred of people. Exodus 34:6

Your idea here reminds me very distinctly of the Calvinistic viewpoint. And, Calvinistic doctrine does great violence to the character of God. It makes Him into a sadistic, autocratic, arbitrary individual who delights in suffering. These are the very attributes of Satan and make millions abhor the very idea of God.

Now, I'm sure you'll tell me that this is once again human logic, but God tells us that we are to come together and reason with Him. He tells us to use our logical and reasoning powers to come to together with Him that we might understand Him. He also tells us that He will send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth, and that the fruit of the Spirit in our lives is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance. He contrasts that with the works of the flesh which include hatred and all of the behaviors that flow from it, and which will exclude us from heaven.

Notice that there is no hatred in the fruit of the Spirit of God. It exists only in the human heart that has not been regenerated, or born again, through the work of the Holy Spirit. Only those who are partakers of the divine nature through the Holy Spirit are without hatred.

It seems to me that it is you, miz3, who is trying to make God "altogether such an one as thyself", and clothe Him with the attributes of sinful humanity and the devil.

I'm not going to stay and argue with you about this as both of us seem to be very well entrenched in our viewpoints and further discussion seems useless. I just thought a different viewpoint needed to be brought to light.

[cheddar]

What do you do with the God of the old testament?

Miz3 has been basically bringing out OT attributes of God's character.

We may not be under the old covenant anymore but we're still under God and he never changes - Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever.

The old testement was a perfect expression of God's character and the new testament is a perfect expression of God's character.

Like it or not the OT God was very violent and put people to death on a regular basis - he even did it in new testament times (Ananias and Sapphira?).

[miz3]

What do you do with the God of the old testament?

Miz3 has been basically bringing out OT attributes of God's character.

We may not be under the old covenant anymore but we're still under God and he never changes - Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever.

The old testement was a perfect expression of God's character and the new testament is a perfect expression of God's character.

Like it or not the OT God was very violent and put people to death on a regular basis - he even did it in new testament times (Ananias and Sapphira?).