PRINCE SAID:
You tried to use John 3:16 to say that God loves EVERYONE because it says "the world".
WRONG. I NEVER SAID THAT GOD LOVES EVERYONE, AND EVERYONE IS CERTAINLY NOT GODS CHILDREN.
PRINCE SAID:
EXPLAIN THIS!
Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
YOU CANNOT LOVE EVERYBODY IF YOU HATE SOMEBODY! If you say God loves EVERYBODY, you are then saying that God hates NOBODY. So If he hates NOBODY, why does Romans 9:13 say he hates the people opf Esau? (The white man). ANSWER THAT!!!
OKAY I WILL ANSWER THAT. FIRST OF ALL AS I HAVE ALREADY STATED I NEVER SAID GOD LOVES EVERYBODY. SECOND OF ALL BREDREN YOU NEED AN ETOMOLOGY CLASS. LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION BREDREN, DO YOU HATE YOUR MOTHER AND FATHER, BROTHER AND SISTER AND EVEN YOURSELF. BECAUSE IN YOUR INTERPRETATION THATS WHAT CHRIST TOLD YOU TO DO IS HATE THOSE PEOPLE AND YOURSELF. DON'T BELIEVE ME?
Luke 14:26:
If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
GUESS WHAT BUDDY, THERE IS NO WORD IN THE HEBREW LANGUAGE OR ARABIC AS A WHOLE FOR THAT MATTER WHICH MEANS "LOVE LESS." The word hate that is being used here is from the greek word miseo which literally translates to hate. The only word in Hebrew which can express and cordial inclination of approval is 'love'." The word is used even of casual acquaintances. Biblical Hebrew lacks the necessary language to exactly define the comparative sense, i.e., 'more than' or 'less than'. Instead it tends to express two things which may be comparatively of different degree like 'first' and 'second' as extremes such as 'first' and 'last'. In this way love and hate whilst appearing as opposites may in fact be related but lesser terms such as 'love more' and 'love less'.
"If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his." (Deuteronomy 21:15-17)
A Jewish man was not allowed to abandon a 'hated' wife's son's rights of inheritance. But more than this, the Deuteronomy passage describes favouritism between two wives, not absolute love and hatred, for the man bears children by both. Extreme language is used to express even moderate relationships.
Luke 14:26 falls into a category of "extreme language," the language of absoluteness used to express a preference, and may refer to disattachment, indifference, or nonattachment without any feelings of revulsion involved. To seal this matter completely, let's look at some parallel materials which prove our point. The closest example comes from Genesis 29:30-1:
And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years. And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren.
Here, "hated" is clearly used synonymously with one who is loved less. Let it be added that if Jacob hated Leah in a literal way, it is hardly believable that he would consent to take her as his wife at all! (See also Judges 14:16 and Deut. 21:15-17.)
Now here is another example from Jesus, Luke 16:13:
No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.
Such extremes of feeling would be atypical, but the extremes are not meant to be taken literally; the point is that one master will get more dedicated labor than the other.
SO SUMMING UP, GOD CERTAINLY DID NOT FAVOR ESAU, BUT HE WAS LOVED LESS.
PRINCE SAID:
Isa 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.
ISRAEL IS THE WORLD THAT WILL RECIEVE EVERLASTING LIFE ACCORDING TO ISAIAH 45:17!!!!
UH, HOW MUCH MORE CAN YOU TWIST THAT AROUND. ALL OF YOUR EXAMPLES COME FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE COVENANT THAT "USED" TO EXIST BETWEEN ISRAEL AND GOD WAS CANCELED OTHER WISE THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO NEED TO HAVE A NEW TESTAMENT. BUT MAYBE IF YOU READ HEWBREWS YOU WILL OVERSTAND THAT.
|
|
