***If they are different faces of the same God, then you should agree that the OT God was also personal, even if you do not recognize it. A being is either personal or impersonal. Slot machines are impersonal. Some people thing God is like that, acting randomly. ***
We are human and ascribe personality to things that don’t possess it. The OT God did not get ‘familiar’ with us in the way that Jesus, in His human person did. He appeared as a force of nature in the OT, and as a human being in the New.
None us have ever said that God acts randomly.
***Even if that is your personal view, you still agree that it is the same God, right? IOW, I hope you’re not saying that personality suddenly “attached” to God at some point.***
The person of Jesus was created for us so that we could relate to God. God didn’t require a human form. We were able to relate to God much better through Jesus than through fire and lightning and burning bushes.
***My only point is that if we say that God created, then He existed before He created, in human terms. Whatever you want to call that existence before creation, that is the time I am talking about.***
God always was, is and will be. Temporal labelling of God is inaccurate.
***There was love in the Trinity before there was creation, and love is an action that can be measured with time.***
Love is not an action. It is a decision.
***Jesus said that He would not lose THOSE FEW that were given to Him by the Father. That is totally different. You are saying that Jesus DOES lose some who were given to Him by the Father. That simply goes against what scripture teaches.***
No, He says that no one can snatch them out of His hands. That is what Scripture teaches; it also teaches that man, by his own decisions can imperil his soul.
***IOW, those who walked away from Jesus were not actually true followers in the first place. They were posers.***
Every one sins; everyone walks away from God at least on occasion. Does that mean that all are posers? Or can the non posers can sin with impunity?
***It sounds like you are confusing a temporary lapse with a full rejection of God by someone who claimed true faith, but never had it. If God allows true believers to renounce their faiths permanently, then God is a liar and we can trust Him for nothing.***
Micromanaging again. He’s gotta be one busy guy, this Reformed God. Where does God say that believers cannot renounce their faith?
***No, your hierarchy hasn’t accomplished anything in fact along these lines. I meant that logically the Catholic view would have to be that God intended to convey very little in scripture, since your tradition contradicts it so much.***
Such as? A short list might be of help here.
***God DID convey what He wanted, and some are able to see it.***
Ah yes. Being Jesus was rather tiring, wasn’t it? So God therefore had a 1500 year snooze before inspiring Luther and his merry band of Scriptural Visigoths.
Love is not an action. It is a decision.
AH HA! (he says :) I disagree that love is not an action. I work at loving my loved ones all the time. But in any case if you say it is a decision, then that clearly denotes a change. :)
FK: ***IOW, those who walked away from Jesus were not actually true followers in the first place. They were posers.***
Every one sins; everyone walks away from God at least on occasion. Does that mean that all are posers? Or can the non posers sin with impunity?
Of course not. But you demand perfection from believers and that does not happen. Your side says the only other possibility is confession to a priest. Ridiculous. True believers do sin on occasion, but never to a level that would cause the loss of salvation. Otherwise some ONE would have snatched the believer out of God's hands. Scripture forbids this. There is NO exception, explicit or implied, for the believer to snatch himself away from God. That is SOLELY anti-Biblical (not extra-Biblical) Tradition.
Where does God say that believers cannot renounce their faith?
John 10, obviously. It says NO ONE. If a believer counts as one person then he is included in NO ONE. There is no other way to read it. It is explicit and clear. It is easy to understand.