Acts 13:48

What happened on that board?

 

Hardly. I stick to context, you should try it sometime

 

I got banned for being honest enough to speak the truth. I had been warned by one of the mods there that there was a target on my back and that they were looking for an excuse to get rid of me. They weren't able to find one so after a few years they made one up.

 

How petty. You won't have to worry about that here, our administrators and moderators target non-calvinists here :laugh: I know firsthand.

 

Show me one place I have posted here that is out of context. Throwing around unfounded accusations are we? I suspect that if you could come up with a better answer you would have.

 

I was being facetious...

Actually, your second post on this thread alludes to the fact the primary meaning of tasso is what determines the context, and I disagree. The context determines the meaning of tasso.

 

Now that is a stretch. Do you really expect any honest thinking person to swallow that?

 

I don't need a dictionary in this case. The word actually has at least two meanings: ruler and a coin. Look it up for yourself.

OK. So then what is the extent of His control? And in order to keep this discussion short, if you answer everything then does that include man? Keep in mind Dan. 4:34,35.

Talk about context! In order to ignore the fact of the premise you try to step around it by making it say what it doesn't say. Refute the fact of the premise if you can rather than offering up red herrings.

Let me see if I can make it real simple just for you. If God's foresight of our decisions determine His decisions then our decisions control Him. If that is the case our decisions are god and not Him. Whatever controls God is God.

So what do you think His purpose is?

Are we really going to get into the "God is the author of sin" nonsense? Given the fact that God is not the author of sin please explain why sin exists in light of the passages that clearly say that all things are of God.

Do you even know what a Hyper-Calvinist is? I am a high Calvinist to be sure.

Never said that they did.

 

Get a better dictionary, or do not cherry pick the meaning you want to insert. At any rate, do rulers of nations control every action of those they rule?

Third time...God is IN CONTROL. That does NOT mean God controls and determines ever act of man else every command I violate is really Him violating His own commands.

Mere obfuscation. You, a finite being have told God what He must do and how He must act to be sovereign.

Another red herring. Who said anything about "foresight of our decisions"?

He has many purposes...what are you asking?

You are right...it is nonsense. Heresy, actually.

Yes...see your comment just above. There is nothing "high" about accusing God of authoring sin.

 

People say that about Calvinistic versions of many texts everyday...

Do you expect any of us to swallow you're interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9, 1 Tim 2:4, John 3:16-17, or especially verses like:

1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

And

2 Corinthians 5:19
that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation

 

Right, those of every gentile nation that was appointed proved their being appointed by their faith...that was my point. Just like when Calvinists says all means "all kinds" or the world means "all kinds in the world." Same principle here. "As many as" refers not to individuals but to various kinds/nations...

 

Right, I know. And that group is made up of many different people groups. Unlike the Jews, the term "Gentiles" is a group of various nations.

OR...out of that group every people group who was appointed to eternal life believed. In other words, they proved their appointment by believing.

But Gentiles aren't a nation, that just mean "non-Jew" and thus could mean Samaritan, Roman or whatever... The big point of debate in those days was whether or not God granted salvation to other nations besides Israel. Some Judizers argued "no" while others allow for some lessor hated groups in as long as they converted to Judaism first. Different nationalities were hated more than others and the author is attempting to show that various nations represented were coming to faith proving their appointment by God.

 

Or course not. But I don't believe God desires all men to be saved without exception either. He desires all men to freely choose to repent and worship Him, not that everyman will just be saved regardless of what they would freely decide.

 

I try not to get into these discussions, but the quoting of 2 Cor 5:19 prompts a question.

If "world" in that verse means everyone without exception, how, then can this verse not be interpreted as universalism? I look forward to the exegesis.