Oh yea??? Well, right back at ya! :laugh:
:1_grouphug:
Calvinism Denies Scripture: "All" = Some
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Bismarck, Sep 18, 2007.
Page 2 of 4
-
-
Picky , picky WD . Please let common sense prevail .
-
Matthew 3:5-7
Then went out to him of Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan.
And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism
Would you say that the all's in verse 5 according to your understanding would have to include all the Pharisees and Sadducees? Verse 7 would seem to indicate that all the Pharisees and Sadducees in all Judaea did not come to his baptism. Does the context that includes verse 7 suggest that all the Pharisees and Sadducees in Judaea were baptized of him and all of them confessed their sins? -
What is the point?
We "all" know that "all" does not "all"ways mean "all" all the time and in "all" cases.
HankD -
-
That is all.
:laugh: :laugh: -
All Things Considered ...
... It's all right ! -
I don't think I was picky at all. If you are lumping all humans into your definition of "all", you must include Christ. -
-
-
-
-
BW , your meow's are pitiful . As I said before there are good commentators who take different positions on the ( for want of a better expression ) "hyperbolic issue" . It's not a Calvinist vs. Arminian subject . I know you want to make it into one very badly though . If non-Calvinistic commentators do not share your point of view on the subject what will you do ? Will you call them closet Calvinists ? Everything is not C vs. A .
-
With respect, you are N-O-T reading this verse.
The verse does NOT say, "Augustus registered all the world".
The verse DOES say, "Augustus ORDERED all the world to be registered."
If the Emperor of China, who views his land as the "navel of the world", orders all the world to be taxed, are his courtiers going to nay-say him, and point out that Japan and Korea and the Mongol horsemen aren't part of the Celestial Empire??
Some day, we will find archaeological records of the decree, and it will read, "Augustus ordered all the world to be registered".
Scripture stands, as is. It does not need your "Eisegesis" = loose interpretation of Scripture guided by your preconceived notions.
YHWH-God wishes for ALL mankind to be saved.
Yet, many choose to betray their Maker, as ungrateful brat children who spurn the hands who fed them (and much more).
"...that all should come to repentance" is NOT the same thing as "that all HAVE come to repentance" or "that all WILL come to repentance".
Again, we are engaging in "eisegesis" = reading INTO Scripture, instead of just plain reading it. -
(How about this —*they go to his Baptism.... and John the Baptist accosts them for their superficiality, in going through the motions of being Baptized so as to not appear sinful to the masses, even though hypocritically they hadn't repented at all...
"ye are like unto whited sepulchres".)
Scripture stands as is. It does not need Calvinistic eisegesis.
PS: Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book XVIII, Chapter 5 confirms the great popularity of John the Baptist amongst the Jews. And cf., Matt 21:24-26:
And Jesus answered and said unto them, 'I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?' And they reasoned with themselves, saying, "If we shall say, 'From heaven'; he will say unto us, 'Why did ye not then believe him?' But if we shall say, 'Of men'; we fear the people; for all (pas, G3956) hold John as a prophet."
Why did they fear the people? B/c all held John as a Prophet... b/c they had all been Baptized by that Prophet.
(The Priests looked doubly bad, b/c they too had been Baptized by the very man they now denied!)
Scripture stands as is. It does not need Calvinistic eisegesis. -
Commentators are not God, we all make mistakes. Why, you wouldn't believe this, but I don't even take all that Doc Ruckman says as exactly right. Shocking isn't it?
BTW, it should be "meows" not "meow's". -
In case you're lost BW , you are referencing John 21:25 , aren't you ? I did not happen to check John Calvin's take on that verse . Again , it's not a Calvinistic issue . It is also not an Arminian issue . Take off your gloves and deal with reality . I'm not changing the Bible . Please don;'t say things so over the line . I wish you knew how to communicate without being so insulting and blasphemous . When you disagree state why -- that is give your reasons for your position . There is no need to say idle things that you will have to give an account for at the Judgment .
-
:laugh: -
Page 2 of 4