How in the world (that's a use of the word that doesn't mean "every single person who ever has or ever will live") can you call a theological view that is and has been rejected or ignored by a majority of the church for 2,000 years a "fact?" Especially when it involves something in the future and a hermeneutical approach that is, at best, suspect? </font>[/QUOTE]Evidently, you didn't read the whole link I posted, so your assessment is based upon the opinion of others from the past, rather than on the Bible, a "common denominator" among calvinist.
:D :D
Did you know that certain parts of scripture wasn't to be revealed until the "time of the end"??
Arminianisms
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Rippon, Feb 23, 2006.
Page 5 of 8
-
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Joh 17:9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
You'll have to explain why God loved the world, but Jesus wouldn't pray for the world God loved.
and why Jesus lied by saying he came to do the will of the father, then refused to pray for a world he didn't come to condemn.
World does have different meaning/application, but calvinst are the ones who fail to interpret it properly in context of Jo 3:16. -
Hello Me4Him.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world...
I have no problem with it but your faith is based on ambiguity.
Why did Jesus lie you ask? Is that preferable to changing your doctrine? For God so loved the world, but Jesus wouldn't pray for it. Thwarted this time by His Son. What a Poor Old Thing He is to be sure.
john. -
No Calvinist that I have seen so far on this board has said "world means believers." I, and others, have said repeatedly that in John 3 "world" means Jews and Gentiles (mankind in general) rather than "every individual that has ever lived."
But thank you for the 22 different definitions of the same word that proves my point that "world" doesn't always mean the same thing. -
My assessment is based on the fact that you whine that Calvin supposedly made stuff up that isn't in the Scripture (which he didn't), and then you make a whole chart based on an 8th day that is found NOWHERE in the Bible.
Maybe I'll make it through the thread one day, but after reading your first misinterpretation and glancing at that chart, I couldn't bring myself to waste any more time. -
My assessment is based on the fact that you whine that Calvin supposedly made stuff up that isn't in the Scripture (which he didn't), and then you make a whole chart based on an 8th day that is found NOWHERE in the Bible.
Maybe I'll make it through the thread one day, but after reading your first misinterpretation and glancing at that chart, I couldn't bring myself to waste any more time. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Le 23:39 Also in the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land, ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days: on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath.
When two sabbaths fell "back to back" (7th-8th days), the second sabbath (8th) was called a "high day", as being "HOLY" also, know why, Jesus was resurrected on that second sabbath, the 8th day, that why the church worships on "Sunday".
Joh 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.
If Adam had not ended the 7th day by sin, there wouldn't be an 8th day, nor a reason for Jesus to die/resurrect, nor a GWT Judgment.
God didn't "predestine" the 8th day, Adam/sin created that day and all the consequences of it.
1.Death of man
2.Death of Jesus
3.death of unbelievers. GWT. -
Hello Me4Him.
on the first day shall be a sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath.
I for one get confused with numbers but I know the Sabbath was from friday night till saturday night and there is only seven days in a week still.
I'm beginning to doubt his suggestion as you say Jesus did not create everything? :cool:
john. -
But you, in your chart, take the eighth day back to creation!?! This has nothing to do with creation, but a feast of Israel.
Notice it doesn't say on the "second sabbath" or on the "eight day." It says "after the sabbath" and the "first day of the week." I think you are trying to read your theological chart into the text rather than taking the plain normative reading of Scripture.
The "second sabbath" would have been from Friday at sundown to Saturday at sundown. Jesus was raised AFTER this second sabbath, not on it.
-
But you, in your chart, take the eighth day back to creation!?! This has nothing to do with creation, but a feast of Israel.
Notice it doesn't say on the "second sabbath" or on the "eight day." It says "after the sabbath" and the "first day of the week." I think you are trying to read your theological chart into the text rather than taking the plain normative reading of Scripture.
The "second sabbath" would have been from Friday at sundown to Saturday at sundown. Jesus was raised AFTER this second sabbath, not on it.
You won't "SEE" the complete picture until all the "pieces" are "in place", read the whole link.
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/28/3398.html -
I'm going to ask another one - Now who is making up a theology with no Scriptural support?
Again, nice chart that means absolutely nothing unless you buy into the "day = 1thousandyears" theory. </font>[/QUOTE]AW, And I thought the chart 'uz right purrty, too!
Even so!
Ed -
Did God "FORCE" Adam/Eve to sin, or did he "ALLOW" them a "CHOICE"??
Adam/Eve were "perfect" and "ALLOWED" to be "IM-perfect", by a choice,
We are "IM-perfect" and allowed to be "perfect", by a "choice", (believing in Jesus)
Having a "FREE WILL CHOICE" to follow the lord or not is taught throughout the scriptures.
Jg 2:22 That through them I may prove Israel,
whether they will keep the way of the LORD to walk therein, as their fathers did keep it,
or not. -
I'm going to ask another one - Now who is making up a theology with no Scriptural support?
Again, nice chart that means absolutely nothing unless you buy into the "day = 1thousandyears" theory. </font>[/QUOTE]AW, And I thought the chart 'uz right purrty, too!
Even so!
Ed </font>[/QUOTE]They say a picture is worth a "thousand words",
but I'm beginning to think a thousand pictures couldn't explain ten words to some. :D
Nowatimean, Vern??? -
Second of all, God's foreknowledge exists because God's sovereignty exists. Your comment on the 8th day seemed to suggest that God set his plan in motion and, oops, man came and messed it up, so God started plan B and used man's 8th day sin to correct the situation. The Bible says that God knows the end from the beginning. The Bible says that Christ is the lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.
We are not just imperfect, we are dead. We are not sick, we are dead. We are not drowning (sinking deep in sin, as the song goes), we have sunk. We sin by choice, but we will never choose right even though the choice is out there. It is not that the choice isn't there, it is that we will never choose it. This is not God's fault, it is ours.
The Bible never says we are "allowed" to be perfect. The Bible says we are perfected. The Bible says we are raised. The Bible says we are sanctified. The Bible says we are foreknown. The Bible says we are predestined. The Bible says we are called. The Bible says we are justified. The Bible says we are glorified. All of these are verbs in the passive voice in the Greek. That means that it is not something we do, it is something that is done to us.
-
Originally posted by Me4Him:
Ro 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he
also
did predestinate
to be conformed to the image of his Son,
"foreknow", ALSO "predestinate".
Why the double adjectives???Click to expand...
You're saying God "predestined" Adam to sin, but Scriptures says God doesn't tempt man with sin, did God "deliberately" create a perfect world with the intentions of destroying it, or was it a "CHOICE" left up to "man"???Click to expand...
Perhaps you could explain why Peter tells these Jew that Jesus was delivered up by God according to His foreknowledge and determined purpose, if it wasn't part of God's plan?
Acts 3:18 But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled.
Perhaps you could explain how Peter didn't understand that God wasn't in any way responsible for the "free-will" actions of the men who killed Jesus when he said that God fulfilled the suffering of Jesus.
Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.
Maybe you could explain how God bruised Him and put Him to grief if He had nothing to do with the "free-will" actions of men.
Calvinists try to balance all of the Scriptures. Men sin because they want to. But every action of man is considered in God's foreordained plan. This is the testimony of Scripture. Again, primary cause (God), secondary causes (men).
That's "exactly" what happen, God planted "Wheat", Satan planted the Tares, but calvin's doctrine can't explain "WHY" God allowed satan to plant the tares in the first place.Click to expand...
You, on the other hand, in order to "make God fair," want to explain that God created man and Lucifer and stepped back, not sure what would happen. When His deepest fears came true, that Lucifer and man would reject Him, He had to come up with another plan since the first one was messed up.
"WHY" would God give Adam/Eve/Satan the opportunity to destroy his "perfect creations",Click to expand...
and "WHY" would God make it possible through Jesus for the wages of sins for the whole world to be paid???
Calvins' doctrine can't answer that question in context of scripture.Click to expand...
Ephesians 1:4-6 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.
Mt 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
And neither is it God's fault that the many who are called are not chosen, it's "man's fault". (unbelief)Click to expand...
On the one hand you place the blame on man for being a sinner,
then place the Blame on God/predestination for some men remaining a sinner, when God loved the whole world and sent Jesus, not to condemn, but to die for the sins of the whole world that the whole world "MIGHT BE" saved.Click to expand...
Like a "pendulum", your doctrine swings from one side to the other.Click to expand...
The Bible says we are predestined. To be saved, "WHERE"?????Click to expand...
Predestine comes from the Greek word prohoridzo which means to determine beforehand. In the case of these three verses it involves determining one's destiny. That most certainly involves salvation.
Then perhaps you can explain why God holds a "DEAD/BLIND MAN" accountable for "Falling in the Ditch"???
Mt 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13 But he answered and said, Every plant, (Tares,) which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.Click to expand...
As I've said before, Calvin's doctrine isn't "Consistent" throughout the scriptures,Click to expand...
Calvin blame God/predestination for some going to hell,Click to expand...
while scripture says God made it possible for "ALL MEN" to be saved and only "UNBELIEF" prevent "ALL MEN" from being saved.Click to expand...
2) We don't deny that unbelief prevents people from being saved. We affirm that because the Bible, in fact, does say it. -
Calvibaptist
I didn't say there wasn't a theological difference between foreknowledge and predestination. I said you had no business lecturing me on that difference, since in a previous thread you claimed that "predestination" was made up by Calvin.
You believe that God was surprised by Adam and Eve's sin and had to come up with plan B? That's a very dangerous belief. Calvin's doctrine (biblical Christianity) explains sin the way the Bible does. Man willingly chose to sin and whatever God has foreordained comes to pass to the praise of His glorious grace.
You, on the other hand, in order to "make God fair," want to explain that God created man and Lucifer and stepped back, not sure what would happen. When His deepest fears came true, that Lucifer and man would reject Him, He had to come up with another plan since the first one was messed up.Click to expand...
Man willingly chose to sin and whatever God has foreordained comes to passClick to expand...
You, on the other hand, in order to "make God fair," want to explain that God created man and Lucifer and stepped back, not sure what would happen.Click to expand...
You believe that God was surprised by Adam and Eve's sin and had to come up with plan B?Click to expand...
God created a "perfect world", Plan A, Adam sinned, making Jesus necessary, Plan B.
Now explain why God's "Sovereign will", Plan A, didn't prevent sin from entering in the first place, especially when Jesus died to redeem every sins ever committed to restore the earth back to "Plan A". (New earth)
"WHY" does Man have to go through this "process" of "plan B" when God's "sovereign will" "COULD HAVE"... "ENFORCED", Plan A???
1 You didn't give the Scripture that says "God made it possible for all men (every single person who ever lived) to be saved.Click to expand...
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
You sure are Forgetful. -
Originally posted by Me4Him:
God created a "perfect world", Plan A, Adam sinned, making Jesus necessary, Plan B.
Now explain why God's "Sovereign will", Plan A, didn't prevent sin from entering in the first place, especially when Jesus died to redeem every sins ever committed to restore the earth back to "Plan A". (New earth)
"WHY" does Man have to go through this "process" of "plan B" when God's "sovereign will" "COULD HAVE"... "ENFORCED", Plan A???Click to expand...
Everything that has transpired since God first said, "Let there be light" is Plan A. There is no plan B. If there had to be a Plan B, that would make God a reactionary God that didn't know the future and had to come up with something different after man messed up his first plan.
That is what you are saying when you talk about man forcing God to come up with Plan B and send His Son. You may not think you are saying it, but that is the logical conclusion of your statements. Jesus was "slain before the foundation of the world." We were "chosen in Him before the foundation of the world." He works "all things according to the counsel of His will." Jesus was "foreordained before the foundation of the world." Therefore, everything that had to happen to bring about the necessity for the death of Christ was Plan A, not a reactionary Plan B.
You didn't give the Scripture that says "God made it possible for all men (every single person who ever lived) to be saved.Ro 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.Click to expand...
This whole section of Romans 5 is talking about all those related to Adam vs all those who are related to Christ. Most theologians (Calvinist, Arminian, and everyone in between) agree with this. All those related to Adam by birth (that would be every human that has or will ever lived) are brought under judgment by his sin. All those related to Christ by birth (regeneration) are given the free gift of justification because of His obedience.
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.Click to expand...
The context of the passage deals with a variety of types of men that we are to pray for - kings and all who are in authority. It is quite legitimate from a Greek grammar standpoint to translate this verse "Who desires all types of men to be saved." This better fits the context since we are to pray for kings and all who are in authority. It also fits the end result that we see in heaven when we see not every single person who has ever lived standing there, but all types of people from every tribe, nation, and tongue. God gets what He desires, as He always does. -
ha ha well lets look at context, calvinist hate that and fear it.
Verse one:
FIRST of all, then, I urge that entreaties AND prayers, petitions AND thanksgiving, be made on behalf of ALL MEN, pray for Kings and all who are in authority (everyone is in authority to someone down to kids and thier parents) in order to meet a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.
verse 6 ...who gave himself a ransom for all, or was it just for kings? See if you follow your reasoning that it means only men who are kings or in government then those are the ones who God died for if we continue to use all out of context here. Or verse 6 would read like...who gave Himself as a ransom for all kings. Are all kings saved? -
Originally posted by Timtoolman:
ha ha well lets look at context, calvinist hate that and fear it.
Verse one:
FIRST of all, then, I urge that entreaties AND prayers, petitions AND thanksgiving, be made on behalf of ALL MEN, pray for Kings and all who are in authority (everyone is in authority to someone down to kids and thier parents) in order to meet a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.Click to expand...
If I were to say, "This year, I want to give a Christmas present to everyone, to my mother, father, brothers and sisters." It does not mean that I want to give a Christmas present to every person who has ever lived. I have limited the generic by the specific. This is what Paul does in 1 Timothy 2. THAT is the context.
verse 6 ...who gave himself a ransom for all, or was it just for kings? See if you follow your reasoning that it means only men who are kings or in government then those are the ones who God died for if we continue to use all out of context here. Or verse 6 would read like...who gave Himself as a ransom for all kings. Are all kings saved?Click to expand... -
I think you are right here calvi, it is a better interptation. really.
Page 5 of 8