# God’s Love, or, Are You Jesus’ Friend?



## Ed Walsh (Sep 16, 2017)

Friends,

The article below was first posted by _PuritanCovenanter_ on the _“You're Accepted As You Are”_ thread. (https://goo.gl/gvNvFL post #5). I thought it was excellent and said so. But there wasn’t any interaction on the post. So I am posting the article again, with a catchy title, to see if there might be any additional thoughts from our members. To me, it was both confirming and eyeopening. Here it is again:
https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2017/08/13/the-love-of-god/

Reactions: Edifying 1


----------



## Jeri Tanner (Sep 16, 2017)

Ed Walsh said:


> Friends,
> 
> The article below was first posted by _PuritanCovenanter_ on the _“You're Accepted As You Are”_ thread. (https://goo.gl/gvNvFL post #5). I thought it was excellent and said so. But there wasn’t any interaction on the post. So I am posting the article again, with a catchy title, to see if there might be any additional thoughts from our members. To me, it was both confirming and eyeopening. Here it is again:
> https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2017/08/13/the-love-of-god/



Thanks for posting this again Ed, and thanks to Randy for sharing it. It is, as you say, both affirming and eye-opening. It's encouraging to think how the trials he sends- and some are very heavy- are to keep his dear ones from sinning and displeasing him. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## arapahoepark (Sep 17, 2017)

I still feel perplexed by the issue. While we must not sin,is it not the Holy Spirit's working through progressive sanctification? Is access to the Lord through intercession hindered? I guess I am not quite seeing the degrees of love per each Christian, but perhaps I read it as an overreaction to rank antinomianism. I stand to be corrected.


----------



## earl40 (Sep 18, 2017)

Ed Walsh said:


> Friends,
> 
> The article below was first posted by _PuritanCovenanter_ on the _“You're Accepted As You Are”_ thread. (https://goo.gl/gvNvFL post #5). I thought it was excellent and said so. But there wasn’t any interaction on the post. So I am posting the article again, with a catchy title, to see if there might be any additional thoughts from our members. To me, it was both confirming and eyeopening. Here it is again:
> https://rpcnacovenanter.wordpress.com/2017/08/13/the-love-of-god/



Having read this twice I have a problem with a complacent love in God which is simply not a proper distinction in my opinion of the love of God. Even as Turretin said below...."as if". If God is His attributes (He is) then there is no way God grows in love, and one should take scripture in a way that we can understand by analogy, but not to take such analogy too far by thinking God is like man and reacts to what we do.

"Francis Turretin notes the language of John 14:23, where Christ promises the love of the Father to those who love Christ, “not affectively and as to its beginning (as if the love of the Father then begins, since he loved us before, 1 John 4:10),"


----------



## Ed Walsh (Sep 18, 2017)

earl40 said:


> Having read this twice I have a problem with a complacent love in God which is simply not a proper distinction in my opinion of the love of God.



Thanks for your comments. This is what I was hoping for when I posted this article. Below is a paragraph that got my attention when I read the article. And thanks for taking the time to read it twice.

Jesus was, and is, the God-man, but a man nonetheless. He is still a man. The paragraph below is perhaps the primary argument in the article.

While on earth, *Christ apparently did not love all people equally*. His choice of disciples was a matter of election, though obviously not in a soteric way in the case of Judas. There is no doubt that Jesus loved all of his true disciples (John 13:1; 14:21; 15:9; 17:9, 12). But there was one special disciple “whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 21:7, 20). This disciple was, I believe, John. As William Hendriksen comments, this name (“the disciple whom Jesus loved”) “had been given to this one disciple, to him alone. Is it not possible that the others had bestowed this honorable title upon him when they noticed the intimate character of the fellowship between him and the Master?”(268) In his human nature, Christ desired fellowship with other human beings. Just as we experience different levels of intimacy in our relationships, it should come as no surprise to us that Christ experienced differing degrees of intimacy with his disciples. In the case of John, Christ seems to have had a special relationship. The other examples of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus also confirm this point.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Sep 18, 2017)

arapahoepark said:


> I still feel perplexed by the issue. While we must not sin,is it not the Holy Spirit's working through progressive sanctification? Is access to the Lord through intercession hindered? I guess I am not quite seeing the degrees of love per each Christian, but perhaps I read it as an overreaction to rank antinomianism. I stand to be corrected.



As I mentioned above to Earl, this is why I posted the article. I am not 100% sure of its thesis either. But I am very interested in the subject. Granted, the paper is teaching something different than what we are used to hearing. Thank you too for taking the time to read the article.

Three times Danial was called "greatly beloved," and my quote above talks about John being the disciple that Jesus loved.

Daniel 9:23 (KJV)
At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.

Daniel 10:11 (KJV)
And he said unto me, O Daniel, a man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak unto thee, and stand upright: for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken this word unto me, I stood trembling.

Daniel 10:19 (KJV)
And said, O man greatly beloved, fear not: peace be unto thee, be strong, yea, be strong. And when he had spoken unto me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord speak; for thou hast strengthened me.


----------



## earl40 (Sep 18, 2017)

Ed Walsh said:


> Jesus was, and is, the God-man, but a man nonetheless. He is still a man. The paragraph below is perhaps the primary argument in the article.
> 
> While on earth, *Christ apparently did not love all people equally*. His choice of disciples was a matter of election, though obviously not in a soteric way in the case of Judas. There is no doubt that Jesus loved all of his true disciples (John 13:1; 14:21; 15:9; 17:9, 12). But there was one special disciple “whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 21:7, 20). This disciple was, I believe, John. As William Hendriksen comments, this name (“the disciple whom Jesus loved”) “had been given to this one disciple, to him alone. Is it not possible that the others had bestowed this honorable title upon him when they noticed the intimate character of the fellowship between him and the Master?”(268) In his human nature, Christ desired fellowship with other human beings. Just as we experience different levels of intimacy in our relationships, it should come as no surprise to us that Christ experienced differing degrees of intimacy with his disciples. In the case of John, Christ seems to have had a special relationship. The other examples of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus also confirm this point.



The root of my criticism (hopefully taken as constructive) is exactly what you pointed out in that Jesus is both man and God and we ought to distinguish but not separate His two natures. Jesus as a man, no doubt had some relations which are more more close than others. This area is not an easy area, and I understand the confusion that arises when the subject of the impassibility of God arises. Even the contention that Jesus "grew in favor" should be understood that The Father and The Holy Spirit loved Jesus just as much when He was born as when he died, and the knowledge that scripture is accommodating to our creaturely understanding.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Sep 18, 2017)

earl40 said:


> Even the contention that Jesus "grew in favor" should be understood that The Father and The Holy Spirit loved Jesus just as much when He was born as when he died, and the knowledge that scripture is accommodating to our creaturely understanding



Earl,

So that I can better understand your view, can I ask if you are you egalitarian when it comes to rewards in heaven? Will Jesus treat all Christians exactly the same in eternity?

Do you think the _love_ or _favor_ of God will be equal towards all in heaven? How about now on earth? I know _favor_ and _love_ are different words, but I think for purposes of this discussion they have things in common. Besides, you equated the two terms of _love_ and _favor_ interchangably or synomonously. You shared your interpretation of Jesus' growth in favor with God as an "accommodation to our creaturely understanding." So I have to ask, Did Jesus, the God/man increase in wisdom? How about stature? What about favor with man? Are you sure your understanding of Jesus' growth in favor with God is accurate?

Luke 2:52 (KJV 1900)
52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.


----------



## earl40 (Sep 18, 2017)

Ed Walsh said:


> Earl,
> So that I can better understand your view, can I ask if you are you egalitarian when it comes to rewards in heaven?



No I believe our rewards are based on works which are the result of His grace, and I happily will lay these at His feet knowing such.




Ed Walsh said:


> Will Jesus treat all Christians exactly the same in eternity?



I do not believe He will play favorites in eternity. As a father my ideal is to love all my children the same, and recognize that one child may be more deserving of rewards than another. So though I may treat one child differently or grant them more rewards does not mean I love the other less.



Ed Walsh said:


> Do you think the _love_ or _favor_ of God will be equal towards all in heaven?



I believe the love or favor of God is not synonymous in that God is allowed to be more favorable, or display more or less grace, to whom ever He wills. I believe this favor is based on His will alone and not on degrees of love.



Ed Walsh said:


> How about now on earth?


 I see no difference here on earth.



Ed Walsh said:


> I know _favor_ and _love_ are different words, but I think for purposes of this discussion they have things in common. Besides, you equated the two terms of _love_ and _favor_ interchangably or synomonously. You shared your interpretation of Jesus' growth in favor with God as an "accommodation to our creaturely understanding." So I have to ask, Did Jesus, the God/man increase in wisdom?



In human wisdom yes.



Ed Walsh said:


> How about stature?



In human stature yes.



Ed Walsh said:


> What about favor with man?



With man of course. 



Ed Walsh said:


> Are you sure your understanding of Jesus' growth in favor with God is accurate?



Sure I am sure. Everything I believe I believe is true, though I am not deluded to believe everything I believe is true. LOL Of course I believe God was gracious to Our Lord especially during the times of trial and passion.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

