The Freewillers Shell Game part 1.

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Jarthur001, Nov 1, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    In my years since taking on the Doctrines of Grace, I have seen the freewillers play a shell game with words. This will be a 1st of a few threads to address the smoke a mirrors that freewillers try to pull. Most of the time on the BB, we only talk about Calvinism and hardly ever look at the shell game of freewill. I know this maybe strong words to some, but it is rather easy to back up, in time. :)

    Shell game one…Foreknow
    The 1st word we will look at is Foreknow. To the freewiller, Foreknow means what God sees what will happen. It is said by freewillers that, God elects based on what He knows will happen. The word as used in the Bible means more than foreknowledge about persons and what will happen sometime in the future, it is the foreknowledge of persons.

    The Greek word comes from 2 words one being ginosko the same one found in Matt….”And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS”

    This gives the right meaning, in that it means to know in a personal way. This is why we see in In Rom 8:29,30, the foreknown are predestined to the image of Christ, and are called, justified and glorified. It means knowing as in relationship. This goes hand in hand with predestined. In 1Pe 1:2, the word for "foreknowledge" is the same as "foreordain" in the twentieth verse of the same chapter, where the meaning cannot be "foreknowledge" about Christ. God's foreknowledge about persons is without limitations; whereas, His foreknowledge (to know as used with Mary) of a person is limited to those who are actually saved and glorified.

    But this is only to look at the real meaning as the Bible teaches. How about this shell game? The freewillers view sounds like it may work. But does it? From here on out we will look at the word as used by freewillers to see if it works.

    If God foreknows (as used by freewillers) before God predestined, this is hyper-Calvinism other then God is not in control. In this view, what God sees will happen, God must make happen, or what He saw was not really the end of things. God is limited and controlled by what man does. If God changes things in this view God would be changing what He foreknow would happen. If God did this changing, why did He not know about the change? God must do as He saw “done” in the future, or God did not really see the end.

    Now at this point we often hear about God and time. This is yet another shell game, but it will come up, so we must address it as well. God is outside of time. Man is not. Man is made by God. Man is elect. When God elects man, being that man is time, God elects a man in time. Therefore all words addressing time God placed in the Bible to give the right meaning to us. If God says Christ will return, this means it will happen. If the Bible says God made the world in 6 days, it means 6 days. If the Bible says Christ arose from the grave in 3 days, it means 3 days. 1 day is like a 1000 years…means 1 real day…is like 1000 real years with the Lord. Weeks have a few meanings…but they always mean time frames.

    So, when we read God foreknew us before the world was made, this means God foreknew us before the world was made.
    ************************
    Now the shell game.

    Could Cain have been saved under this foreknowing view?
     
  2. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, if God says it then it is true?
     
  3. Pipedude

    Pipedude
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    What's a shell game?
     
  4. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    A shell game is a fast moving trick. You have 3 shells and a tea. You place a pea under one shell and the viewer must keep track of which shell has the pea. The one moving the shells moves quickly, so as not to let the view see what is going on.

    Likewise in some doctrines, they sound ok..with fast talking people. The trick is, never to study it the facts. But when you slow down and see if it will work...it will not. Some of these views will not let the other one work, as we soon shall see.

    Thus the shell game doctrine of freewill. :)
     
    #4 Jarthur001, Nov 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2006
  5. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    I Peter Teaches Free Will and Against Philosophical Calvinism


    7. so that the proof of your faith, (Who’s Faith?) Their faith - Possessive Pronoun.
    When similar pronouns are used it means what it says. The individual possess Free Will, or Capacity to believe or not-believe plane and simple- no philosophy like the Philosophical Calvinist teach. Just the Bible straight from God not made up by man.

    {being} more precious than gold which is perishable, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
    8. and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory,

    9. obtaining as the outcome of your faith the salvation of your souls.
     
  6. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wouldn't call it a shell game. It's trickier than that. It's very similar to the technique evolutionists use to "prove" evolution. They reinterpret the evidence to prove evolution no matter what the evidence actually shows.

    I think I've cited this example before, but here's one example: Speciation. There is a case where mosquitos in a London subway separated into two colonies. One colony kept reproducing with mutuation until those mosquitos could no longer produce offspring by mating with the mosquito colony where they originated. Evolutionists call that speciation. The fact that the second colony can no longer produce offspring with the first means that the second colony is now a new species. If it's a new species, it "proves" evolution.

    So what do you say to these evolutionists? You say that you can cross a lion with a tiger to get a liger. That's an example of two species that can produce offspring. Their answer? The fact that they can produce offspring shows that they have common ancestry, and therefore proves evolution once again. It doesn't matter that this example contradicts the earlier one about speciation.

    The end result is that it is impossible to reason with them because they will invent phrases and reinterpret (read: rewrite) facts in order to maintain their viewpoint.

    Why did I go through all this? Because while I think you are stating the facts correctly about things like "knew" and "foreknew", I think it will be a futile exercise. Free willers will always find a way to cram the square election peg into the round free will hole, even if it takes redefining terms and then contradicting them.
     
  7. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Gordon and welcome to BB.

    Not really. If we read the context, the meaning is clear. We will address "freewill" in time. This was more about "foreknow". But being that you brought this up, lets be short and address it now.

    The text...

    Notice 1st this was believers that the writer addresses. Is this not why we have a possessive pronoun? We ALL must believe..no? Salvation is a relationship. The faith is indeed our own, for it is US that must have the faith. Election is not salvation, but unto salvation.

    Now to the text at hand.

    Gill says....
     
  8. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exegisis of Eph 2:8

    The following is the correct exegesis of the Greek text of Eph 2:8.

    Nothing in the exegesis is fake, false, make believe, deceptive etc. I have laid out each word with the Greek first, then the English next. Following the English I break down the word according to grammar. I then define certain terms germane to its understanding. If you have a legitimate question I will answer it if you ask in a spirit of kindness.

    God Bless Gordon. Truth according to Truth


    1-t h 2-g a r 3-c a r i t i 4-e s t e 5-s e s w s m e n o i 6-d i a 7-p i s t e w s

    8-k a i 9-t o u t o 10-o u k 11-e x 12-u m w n 13-q e o u 14-t o 15-d w r o n

    16-o u k 17-e x 18 e r g o n


    1. t h - The - Definite Article, dative case, feminine , singular

    2. g a r - for - Conjunction, Subordinating

    3. c a r i t i - by grace - Noun, dative case, feminine , singular


    For by the grace


    4. e s t e - you are - Verb, indicative mood, present tense, active voice, Second person, plural in number

    Significance of this word. The fact that this very “are” is present tense active voice tells us that the believer is producing an action .

    The verb is correctly translated “you Christians are” or “you are” .The word is a second person plural verb and the subject of the verb is inherent in the verb.

    The subject to the verb is the same subject of the next perfect passive voice verb. The active participation is coming from those who are represented by the plural second person you.

    The natural question in this regard is to ask what they are themselves actively participating and causing the action of.

    We know it can’t be Grace, That is God’s work and Gift.

    We know that it can’t be salvation which is a gift. Salvation can’t be given unless there is Grace. In that there is Grace and Grace is to offer salvation both a gift form God.

    The language is clear but the English fails to show this and because some are not willing to deal in grammatical facts they missuse and interpreter this verse to say “faith” is a gift based upon this verse. Grammatically this can not be done. It is emphatic as well. (Grace is a gift in the sense that it is a part of us because we are created in the image of God) but it is not a gift in this verse.

    5. s e s w s m e n o i - having been saved -Verb, participle, perfect, passive voice , nominative, masculine, second person, plural

    Significance of this word. In that this verb is a perfect passive verb and stands in relationship to number 4 “you are” tells us that the individuals that are actively participating in active faith and passively receiving salvation. The fact that salvation is passive and faith active solves the issue so many try to solve with these verses. Man actively has faith. And we are told in the verses that this faith is not a work. We know that from common sense, but these verses clearly makes sure that the attentive reader does not see faith as a special gift.

    The activity is believing and the passiveness is receiving.

    This verb is to be understood as starting at a point and continuing . These “you” were saved at a point in time.

    It does not point it eternity past that to is impossible.

    The perfect tense is a process completed. It views that process - starting at a point in time - and as having reached its consummation that is existing in a finished state.

    So those who are actively having faith in God’s Grace are “having been saved”..

    Think of it this way. You are lost this moment. Now, the next moment you are saved. As soon as you are saved the next moment is present and so no and the moment of salvatioin is now past. That point is seen as perfect tense.

    Time is every moving and the point of salvation is past but starting in time and continuing.

    The other neat part is its continuing is seen as a finished state. That is Eternal security in a nut shell so to speak.

    6. d i a - through - preposition, genitive case

    7. p i s t e w s - faith - Noun, genitive case

    Through faith or by faith - this construction is called the genitive case.

    So what is this case?

    The meaning or function or purpose of the genitive case is to point out or designate. What does that mean?

    Because the word “d i a /dia” through or by is used it makes “faith” the tool so to speak.
    Faith is designated as an instrumental to accomplish something.

    Technically we would say that the limit in receiving salvation is set to the limit of “faith” only. Genitive sets this limit.

    8. k a i - and - Adjective, pronominal or Conjunction, coordinating
    ------------------------------------------------------9. t o u t o - this - adjective, pronominal, demonstrative, nominative, neuter, singular

    10. o u k - not - adjective, adverb

    11. e x - of - Preposition, genitive

    12. u m w n - of you - Pronoun, genitive, second person, plural

    13. q e o u - of God - Noun, genitive, masculine, singular

    14. t o - the - definite article, nominative, neuter, singular

    15. d w r o n - gift - Noun, nominative, neuter, Singular

    You have noticed that I have made the word neuter larger. These three words go together so why are they apart, its Greek to me. No, that is true it is Greek.

    The antecedent of “this the gift” points back to faith.

    The word “doron” gift is mainly found in the NT writing in the Neuter case and if my memory serves me correctly sometimes in the feminine.

    The context dictates the antecedent when it is neuter. In this passage the context supports “faith” as the antecedent empathically.

    There is absolutely no way around the Greek construction unless ones intentionally manipulates the language and meaning of it.

    Let me draw your attention back to the verb “are”.

    Remember that the subject of the verb uses a plural people because the verb is in the second person plural.

    These people are the saved people Paul is talking to and all saved people.

    The subject of this verb is actively participant in the process.

    We know that a person can not actively participate in producing Grace.

    We know that a person can not actively participate in redemption - salvation is a gift.

    We know that over and over again saving faith is called your faith, their faith, his faith, etc. Faith unto salvation is the only part of the statement that is not a gift and never was called a gift.

    There is a spiritual gift of faith but the word used there for “gift” is not “DORON” but “CHARISMA”

    What does this mean?

    The spiritual gifts given to the already saved are special gifts that are given to some not all and has nothing to do with saving faith. Saving faith’s word is “DORON” not “CHARISMA”

    OK, you can do a word search on your computer or books and you will find that no where is believing faith called a gift.

    This is not the real issue. The issue in the Eph. text is correct exegesis.

    The grammar in this text can not, will not, never has, supported the word faith as a Gift, it simply is impossible.

    The argument that because the word gift is neuter teaches that it points to faith in the verse as the gift and some say all of it can not legitimately be supported grammatically. It just can’t be done.

    I hope this helps all who are interested in understanding the defense against the teachings that TULIP theology. I have given you the correct and accurate exegesis of this text. Anything stating differently is false.

    God Bless. Gordon

    Sorry about the Greek - The English letters for the Greek will have to do. Any questions just ask.
     
  9. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was being nice. :) :cool:
     
  10. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    I fail to see your point. The action is the faith...which is given to the believer. doron is tranlated 18 times as gift and one time as offering in the JKV. Below is 3 cases.
    You have proven nothing other then the Greek letters do not work.

    This made me smile...
    Thanks....but you need to do better. If you want to take up a study of the book...start a thread and I will be there. deal? :)

    BTW...check out this verse right below your verse.

    Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

    Remember the ol possessive pronoun idea. Who is "His" talking about? :) What is "His" doing? Who is "His"? Who ordained this? When was this ordained?

    Anymore on this..please open a new thread. I'll be glad to join you. I just hate to see this get off subject on the 1st page.
     
    #10 Jarthur001, Nov 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2006
  11. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Confident or Cocky?

    "I hope this helps all who are interested in understanding the defense against the teachings that TULIP theology. I have given you the correct and accurate exegesis of this text. Anything stating differently is false."

    I must say that this failed to help me. This appears to be the classic mistake of showing that one year of Koine Greek under your belt = knowing enough about "the Greek" to get you into trouble.

    I'm not sure how the periphrastic use of the perfect in this verse which includes "you are" can denote anything "active" as opposed to passive because it adds much less than that to this verse. In this periphrastic usage, "este" simply provides the subject, which is second person plural, and nothing more. The periphrastic may substantiate the claim that Paul is stressing the continuous effects of being saved, but one cannot use it to argue for an active "on top of" passive sense to the verse because that's equivocal nonsense and not exegesis.

    As to the famous gender of "touto," most commentators plausibly argue that Paul is linking the previous section to this verse, namely 2:4-8a-the concept of salvation by grace through faith.

    Perhaps unwittingly this junior poster has shown firsthand the shell game of taking a verse that, when given a plain reading in either Greek or English, is trying to argue that man has nothing to boast in salvation and then trying to sneak in an understanding of faith as something less than a gift from God but obviously not a work. Faith may not be a gift from God, but this verse won't help in proving that point, especially if your case is built on a misunderstanding of a periphrastic perfect.

    BJ

    Regarding the poster of the OP's wishes to stay on subject, I will be happy to discuss this further in another thread but not this one.
     
    #11 Brandon C. Jones, Nov 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2006
  12. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Jarthur,

    Let talk about it. Here is what you said.

    Now, let take another look at the first several verses.

    It is true that the letters are addressed to the save. I don't know of a Book/letter that isn't.

    (1) Proof of your faith (countless times faith is used as personal faith, before and after salvation).

    (2) outcome of your faith (here it speaks of pre-salvation faith having an outcome) Even if one does not accept that understanding there are ample uses of personal faith with reference to salvation before and after salvation.

    (3) We both know that the dividing line between TULIP Troops and CURED believers is mainly centered around "who's faith is it". Did God at a given point infuse a person whereby he or she is then able to believe or was believing faith simple a part of mankind in that we are created in the image of God.

    (4) I content the later. I am sure you the former.

    (5) If you are the normal TULIP Trooperet then I won't change you and you won't change me.

    (6) All man is and has is from God - no argument there. The image of God in man has capacity to think, decide, and express emotions. The question that both sides deal with is weather or not man's separateness from God (called dead in trespasses and sin) constitute inability to accept Grace. You would say yes, I would say no.

    (7) Further more, you would hold that Free Willers make grace cheap, Free Willers hold that Calvinist not only cheapen grace but violate God's Holiness.

    Anyway I could go on but that is, for now, enough wood for the fire. I am sure you will eagerly expound on Philosophical Calvinism or as I like to call it Tulipitis.
     
    #12 GordonSlocum, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  13. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is the part of what I said we are dealing with,

    If you would re-read it and notice that the words "are having been saved" This is the point of discussion.

    "Are" is active and "believe" is passive and they are coupled together. The intent and meaning is that those who are saved actively believe and passively receive. These two words simply tells us that the faith is a not designated as a gift according to this verse. These two words render that impossible. That is the Point

    Let me point out - Re-read your quote above. Remember you place "faith" as active. That is incorrect. The Greek spelling absolutely has the word faith in this text as "Passive" and the verb "are" is "Active" We know this because in Greek the way a word is spelled tells us that. No guess work.

    The person actively believes and passively receives. It is a strange thing I admit. But it is what it is.

    Remember this before this discussion goes any further. We are dealing with a particular passage and its construction. All the verses in the would will not change its construction and the meaning the construction gives us. It can be twisted and it has, but what I have told you is what is.

    I think there is only one verse that hints toward believing faith as a gift but it is not this verse. There are mutable verses that tell us plain, clear, and simple that faith is something individuals have the capacity to exercise. This use of the world exercise is not a "work" to gain salvation but the capacity to trust, to surrender ones will, to agree with God, in the mists of rebellion. Man is depraved, but not incapacitated where by he can not accept the free gift of Salvation.

    I know that Calvinist get hung up on the terms "exercise" faith and see it as work. That is not the case. The only way our faith is a work is when it is in any object other than God's Grace or finished work of the Cross. It is either faith in what I devise or in what God demonstrated. Trust in myself or other men or God. Faith is the conduit, not the work, regardless of the descriptive term used to convey what is taking place.

    I know there have been countless illustrations and I know that you will not budge and neither will I. But in all fairness at least we better understand each other’s view.
     
    #13 GordonSlocum, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  14. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0

    Here is an interesting twist.

    (1) Free Willers (count me in) Except I do believe in eternal security and I am pre-mill, see man as having capacity of faith on the basis of the image of God. .

    (2) Now the Philosophical Calvinist or Tulipites (Those who eat Tulip greens and Cal-bread vs. corn bread) No wonder you Tulipites are so off Target on doctrine, believe that faith is infused or injected or forced upon the unwilling at a given point is time and thus the unwilling are not willing, but are made willing by this Benny Hinn trick of infusion of faith. That fascinates me to no end. I can see BH now laying hands not the head of a lost person and telling that person “receive faith for you are one of the special picked designated not to split hell wide open” Wouldn’t you agree?

    Lets analyze this for a moment.

    Regardless of weather man has this Believing faith from the get go or weather he is infused with it at a given point in time - the fact is that he must have faith to be saved. Whichever way you slice the pie. Faith is necessary for salvation.

    God either gives us faith at birth or infuses it later in life.

    Makes not difference when in one sense except it does have any bearing of the never ending debate of few vs. all.

    But that is another issue. Here we have a Calvinist who was infused with faith at a point in time and a non-Calvinist that has his faith from the get go - birth.

    Now they are standing next to each other. Both have faith. Interesting. Both, in order to be save, have to put this faith in action. That is an interesting concept. Here are two individuals who have to believe in order to be saved.

    Both have to exercise this faith. Did you get it. Exercise faith. When the faith became apart of man is one issue, what faith does after the faith is in the men is what it is.

    Both have faith - both exercise the faith - both are declared Elect. If you are saved you are elect. My bible tells me I am Chosen and Elect. I am a Free Wheeler who believes in eternal security. I fit into the 90 plus percent of the Narrow few who are saved. Less than 10 percent are fringe groups like Tulipites.

    What can I say. You know you can't beat me so why not join me.
     
    #14 GordonSlocum, Nov 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 2, 2006
  15. Brother Bob

    Brother Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,723
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very Good, amen
     
  16. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gospel

    All of you are doing your own evil desires even the one’s who are not given the hope the world has in Jesus Christ.

    If you are not following the word of God you are going your own way not the will of God.

    The cross is the cross road. It is the only place where God and sinful man meet face o face.

    There is the only place you have a choice to follow Jesus and live or not and be condemned.

    Romans 1:16
    I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
     
  17. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm at work...but will address these post tonight.
     
  18. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0

    I can respect that . I have to pat you on the back for not stealing company time. On another board a Tulip Troop stayed on a Christian Chat room combating his Philosophical Calvinism. Not a good testimony.

    Have fun doing this. We both know we are not going to change each other. Just be sure and eat your TULIP Greens and keep it civil and have fun.
     
  19. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    So BOGUS

    :laugh: jarthur,

    So God knew us SEXUALLY?? :laugh: :laugh:

    Let's get real, OK? It's Calvinists that have "assigned" your definition to the word foreknow. And what a joke! Of course God knows beforehand "about" and "of" us. Predestining us is step #2 ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE.

    skypair
     
  20. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0

    I agree We have let the Tulip Troops, who are infected with Tulipitis, to redefine words to support their Philosophy - philosophical Calvinism. I still love them in spite of their Tulipitis. They can be stubborn - of course they are "PICKED" to be that way.


    Gordon
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...