What do you make of the Samaritan woman?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by icthus, Apr 16, 2005.

  1. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    In John chapter four we have the well known account of Jesus' encounter with a Samaritan woman. I would like to know some of your thoughts here.

    Jesus Himself says in the Gospels, that his disciples should "go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 10:6). And even John begins his Gospel by saying that Jesus, "came unto His own" (1:11). But, here we have Jesus and this woman from Samaria, whom He says to:

    "If thou knewest the gift of God, and Who it is that says to you, give Me a drink; you would have asked of Him, and He would have given thee living water ...But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of water springing up into eternal life" (4:10,14)

    Here is someone who is not of the "House of Israel", someone who was not of the "elect", and Jesus here clearly says to her, if you would asked Me, I " would have given thee living water . In this context, the "whosoever" CANNOT be restricted to the "elect", as Jesus was not talking to an "elect" person.

    What say ye?
     
  2. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    And how say ye that she was not elect ?
     
  3. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you now saying that a non Jew could be elect? It was ONLY the Children of Israel that are referred to "God's chosen people" in the OT, the time of Jesus talking to this woman is pre-cross. My point is that all are welcome to drink of the water of life freely.
     
  4. rc

    rc
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fish....
    You don't know she wasn't of the elect... if she accepted Christ as the Messiah, she is one of the elect!

    Can't you see farther ahead in your theology?

    Listing a bunch of scenarios where man "chooses" has nothing to do with the debate! Can't you get that? The antecedent to the choice is at what hand.

    All the "choices" in the Bible, all the plea's to "choose" in the Bible are under the umbrella of proof texts that declare Man is unable to come to Him and He will, by His grace decide who will be enabled to delight in God.

    [ April 18, 2005, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     
  5. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    You fail to to understand what Jesus says in this passage. I you would but read, instead of come back to me with nonsense, you may just learn something.

    Who do you think the "Whosoever drinks of the Water", refers to, if not to the the woman, and then to ALL Samaritans? Are you now saying that all the Samaritans to whom this was addressed, are also the "elect"?

    More fancy footwork from the Calvinists, instead of humbly accepting the Truth. Yes, Jesus clearly demonstrates that He also died for ALL the Samaritans, elect or not

    :D [​IMG]

    [ April 18, 2005, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: Pastor Larry ]
     
  6. rc

    rc
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fish,
    Can you please learn the difference between an inductive and an imperative? It would make things allot easier and less redundant around here.
     
  7. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    So Jesus was not serious, right?
     
  8. DeafPosttrib

    DeafPosttrib
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2002
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    Icthus,

    Good question! Keep it up! I do not agree with 'Limited Election' of Calvinism's the five points.

    Keep it up! [​IMG]

    In Christ
    Rev. 22:20 -Amen!
     
  9. whetstone

    whetstone
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/11288.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    0
    proof that the woman at the well was elect:

    Jhn 4:4 And he must needs go through Samaria.

    Objections?
     
  10. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you Calvinists so hard of understanding? Can you not plainly see that the "whosoever" is addressed to not only the woman at the well, but ALL Samaritans. This is the teachings here as Jesus was addressing the woman, who was a Samaritan. Do you now believe that ALL Samaritans are also elect? Remember this conversation was before the Cross.

    Whetstone, its time you, Larry and the rest gave up your twisting of what Scripture teaches, and accept the Bible for what it clearly says.
     
  11. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Are you now saying that a non Jew could be elect? It was ONLY the Children of Israel that are referred to "God's chosen people" in the OT, the time of Jesus talking to this woman is pre-cross. My point is that all are welcome to drink of the water of life freely. </font>[/QUOTE]You err not knowing Scripture. If she had not been one of the elect, chosen in Jesus Christ before the foundation of the world, she would not have been saved.

    Ephesians 1:3-6
    3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
    4. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
    5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
    6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
     
  12. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Great point whetstone.
     
  13. whetstone

    whetstone
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/11288.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe you believe in the total inability of Calvinists to understand the things of God but not of unbelievers? [​IMG]

    Can you not plainly see that the "whosoever" is addressed to not only the woman at the well, but ALL Samaritans.

    But this is a strawman. you won't find any Calvinists arguing against 'whosoever will.' In fact we are great proponents of it- whosoever wills- let him come!

    This is the teachings here as Jesus was addressing the woman, who was a Samaritan. Do you now believe that ALL Samaritans are also elect? Remember this conversation was before the Cross.

    I never said all samaritans were elect. But quite obviously by looking at John 4:4 at least one was.

    Whetstone, its time you, Larry and the rest gave up your twisting of what Scripture teaches, and accept the Bible for what it clearly says.

    It is apparent than your 'clearly' and my 'clearly' are two different things. Do you ever witness to atheists ever? do you realize that you argue your case with the exact same logic they argue thiers?

    'clearly' you would have seen this if you did.
     
  14. MargoWriter

    MargoWriter
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,384
    Likes Received:
    0
    No wonder... I've witnessed to athiests. Yup.
     
  15. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great point whetstone. </font>[/QUOTE]Whats the "great point"? This does not mean that this woman was "elect" that Jesus went through Samaria. But, I keep on stressing to you, that Jesus' words of the "Water of Life" was not ONLY addresed to this woman, but to ALL her people.

    CAN YOU PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE GREAT LOVE THAT JESUS HAS FOR THE LOST WORLD??

    Read also Matthew 23:37

    "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!

    Is Jesus here appealing to the "elect",? NO, it is to those who through choice reject Hi as the Saviour of Mankind. And yet it is to these very people that He is showing His love for!

    Note, Jesus wanted to save them, but they were "unwilling", through their free will. Not that "they could not"; but, "they would not"
     
  16. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,158
    Likes Received:
    322
    "would not" or "could not", what's the difference this side of heaven?

    Whether "would not" or "could not" they "did not" believe and therefore they end up in the Lake of Fire.

    Play it safe and "...preach the gospel to every creature".

    HankD
     
  17. icthus

    icthus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,114
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ah, you don't understand? "could not" means that was was "unable to", while, "would not", means, "that he can, but chose not to"

    This is against those who teach mans "inability" to make a choice in regard to Salvation
     
  18. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,158
    Likes Received:
    322
    I understand completely what it means, my question is what is the difference this side of heaven?

    None.

    Whether one chooses not to or is unable to do so the result is the same.

    Whether one chooses to do so or is predisposed to do so that result is also the same.

    The result has to do with the acceptance or rejection of the message, so play it safe and "...preach the Gospel to every creature".

    BTW, personally, I don't know which it is. In my case and if I were forced to give an answer, I would say that there was neither the ability or the latent desire to do so, although since I did do so, then therefore I must have been pre-disposed to do so.

    How's that for "double-speak"? [​IMG]

    HankD

    [ April 18, 2005, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]
     
  19. whetstone

    whetstone
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/11288.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is basic grammar here icthus.

    Who is Christ speaking to? The elders in Jerusalem
    Who did he want to gather together? The children of the elders.
    Who 'would not?' The elders.

    Notice Christ says 'YE would not' not 'YOUR CHILDREN would not.' In other words, Christ is saying that the elders in Israel were not allowing their children to hear of the truth! He said the same thing only a few verses earlier:

    Matthew 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

    There is no mention in verse 37 whether or not the children DID come to Christ- only that the elders 'would not.' You may buck the will of God and protest it, but you can never thwart it.

    John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

    Best to carefully read scripture and let it speak for itself rather than putting our own slant on things.
     

Share This Page

Loading...