Jesus was a Calvinist?

By the time of John 17, they had already been sent out into the ministry to the house of Israel. Are you saying that Christ revoked their 'sending' or that this earlier was only a 'field exercise.'

I believe and am willing to stand on the truth that they had already been 'sent' thus already ordained of the Lord to their work.

That then which is given at John 17 becomes a prayer with these in view, as well as all future children of God.

I commend you for your recognition of Bro. Glen's remarks, but Amen is a term signifying agreement, and I was just wondering what of his statement you are in agreement with, you answered according to the emotionalism that is expressed, this is ok, but it further proves to me the point that the free-will version of the doctrines of Grace are founded from the emotionalism of man.

Bro. Dallas

 

I suspect that first "sending" is equivalent to an internship for a seminary graduate in the church, or for the medical profession, advanced hands on finishing work and proving one's self in a hospital. Either way, good work is done by those who serve.

Though the final decision one makes to follow the teachings of Jesus ultimately is based on knowledge, there is much emotionalism and emotional released by the one who does submit himself fully to the Christ.

Such emotionalism does not diminish with time, but in fact over time as the truthes one adheres to are made more forceful in one's life, the emotions have a way of manifesting themselves in stronger fashion, especially in Bro. Glen's present situation. I salute him with the deepest respect and sincerest condolences and encouragement while he grieves, and I give him unqualified permission to be emotional in his posts on this BBS, Hence, Amen, Bro. Glen.

 

Dallas,

Most commentators, even Calvinistic ones divide John 17 into three parts:

1. Jesus prays for himself and the work God has given him to accomplish.

2. Jesus prays for his apostles who were involved in that work he was accomplishing in that he trained, equiped and sent them to share the gospel.

3. Jesus prays for those who believe the apostles message.


Questions for you:

1. Do you deny these divisions?
2. When it says "so that he MAY give eternal life to all that the Father gives him." The word "may" indicates a subjunctive tense meaning they may or may not recieve the eternal life, therefore he cannot be refering to the elect as Calvinism defines it. What do you think about that?

 

I was not attempting to censure bro. Glen's passion. I was pointing out that it is the emotionalism in his post you agreed with, not the doctrine he espoused in the same post.

Bro. Bill, you wrote:

Dallas,

Most commentators, even Calvinistic ones divide John 17 into three parts:

1. Jesus prays for himself and the work God has given him to accomplish.

2. Jesus prays for his apostles who were involved in that work he was accomplishing in that he trained, equiped and sent them to share the gospel.

3. Jesus prays for those who believe the apostles message.


Questions for you:

1. Do you deny these divisions?
2. When it says "so that he MAY give eternal life to all that the Father gives him." The word "may" indicates a subjunctive tense meaning they may or may not recieve the eternal life, therefore he cannot be refering to the elect as Calvinism defines it. What do you think about that?

I write;
Joh 17:20 -
Shall believe (πιστευσόντων)
The best texts read πιστευόντων, the present participle, that believe. The future body of believers is conceived as actually existing.
On me through their word
The Greek order is, believe through their word on me. “Believe through their word” forms a compound idea.

Further:

Joh 17:2 -
Power (ἐξουσίαν)
Rev., rightly, authority. See on Joh_1:12.
All flesh
A Hebrew phrase, denoting the whole of humanity in its imperfection. See Gen_6:12; Psa_65:2; Isa_40:5, etc.
That He should give eternal life to as many as Thou hast given Him (ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, δώσῃ αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον)
Literally, that all that Thou hast given Him, to them He should give eternal life. All (πᾶν), singular number, regards the body of Christian disciples collectively: to them, individually.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

[I can't help what Calvinistic commentators have said or done.]

 

Jesus was very much in line with the Arminian view.

John 1 "He came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him NOT" (instead of limited atonement, instead of irresistable grace).

Matt 18 -- "SO shall my heavenly Father do to EACH OF YOU if you do not EACH one forgive your brother from the heart" Matt 18 "FORGIVENESS REVOKED" - instead of "OSAS".

"That WHOSOEVER BELIEVES should have everlasting life" instead of "limited selection".

"I will DRAW ALL MEN UNTO ME" John 12:32(instead of limited atonement).

Luke 8 "Rocky Ground and Thorny Ground" where the DEAD spring to LIFE and then die back again.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Notice that word that I highlighted for you. It's the word "should" (also translated "may" or "might") is an indication of the subjunctive case of the word "give." Which means it may or may not happen depending upon something else. Calvinists believe that "all the father gives" are the elect and that there is no "may" or "might" about their recieveing eternal life. How do you deal with the subjunctive in this verse?

 

That's getting really close to blasphemy in my opinion.

 

Your message is TRUTH and your delivery exquisite!

 

Blasphemy.

That is what the priests accused Jesus of if I read the scriptures correctly.

 

I prefer your previous post.

 

Originally posted by Yelsew:

Every Arminian on here should read the above words with all sincerity and gravity. Good Post Yelsew!! Note particularly the measuring rod, what does this mean

God Bless.
Bro. dallas

 

Frogman, Just what is your take on the Rev 21:15-21?

If it is so important for Arminians, why don't you explain it for us?

 

Well Yelsew,

I am not Arminian, so you wouldn't believe what I said about it no how.

But I would first determine why a 'measuring rod' and why it is a gold one at that, especially since this is the first scripture.

Think about that. What is the meaning of Gold in scripture?

What is the purpose of a measuring rod? It can be two-fold.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Mr. Bill,

Arguing over the subjunctive is more obfuscation and debate nonsense. The passage in question is:

"You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him."

You want to change "should" to "may". Fine. Let's look at what that does to the text.

1. Over whom has God given Jesus authority? All flesh. That means everyone.

2. Whom "may" Jesus give eternal life? To as many as God has given Jesus, which is a subset of "all flesh". You cannot claim that "as many as" means "all" in this case, or else that will come back to bite you when you attempt to use the same text to say that "as many as believed". It's conditional. And what is it conditional upon? Whom God chooses to give Jesus.

Now, if you want to add the subjunctive to that, all you've done is further reduce the number of those who will be saved. Of the subset God has given Jesus, Jesus "may" give some of them eternal life. He "may not".

So in your pitiful attempt to turn this passage into arminianism, you've ended up saying that of the elect, only some subset will be saved according to whether or not Jesus "may or may not" decide to save them. That's worse than the charicature of calvinism arminians like to present.

 

So, even Arminius was a Calvinist. I suspected this.

Bro. Dallas

 

Let us not overlook what brings "eternal life"...That they may know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ. So the question is who can "know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ? Since, Jesus Christ himself invited "whosoever believeth", and since the Old Testament is full of..."to those who love God" messages. This scripture makes it clear that absolutely any person who hears the word of God, and believes in God, and that Jesus is the Son of God, the Christ, will have eternal life. Any other interpretation is simply not acceptable to persons with ears to hear!

 

What about the persons who have ears and hear not, I mean really, my grandpa, two of his brothers and three of his sisters were born deaf. What happens to them?

Are you not also overlooking the fact that the message found in the O.T. is speaking to those who are the people of God?

Bro. Dallas

 

The physically handicapped do have "ears to hear", because "hearing the word of God" is not an auditory experience, it is of the spirit.

The OT people may have been "the people of God", but there are many indications they were not "the people of God" if you get the drift, for they were of the seed of Adam whose sin of disobedience toward God is in every seed of Adam. Thus God did many things to them for their disobedience to cause them to repent thus restoring them.

 

Well, he was until he began reading the Scriptures and found a more compelling understanding of it. That's what ticked Calvin off so much.

 

Nick, your the one using debate trickery here, let's break this down:

I am not the one who "changes" the word "should" to "may." I simply said that was a option of the subjunctive, one that several translators use, not just me. Either way it is not definiate as Calvinism must insists if this is in reference to the elect.

WRONG. "as many as" is the word "pas" which very well could be translated "all" in reference back to "all flesh." So the passage could be saying as is translated by some translators: "...just as You gave Him authority over all flesh; so that He may give eternal life to all You have given Him." In other words, Christ may give eternal life to all the flesh that God gave him authority over. The second "pas" could be refering back to the first "pas". God gave Him authority over ALL; so that He man give eternal life to ALL whom God gave him authority over. (This is one possible translation that some Arminians hold to)

If I want to add the subjunctive? I didn't put the subjunctive there, God did and you still haven't dealt with it in your translation of the text.

You are assuming their is a subset by interpreting "pas" with the phrase "as many as" when it could be translated "all." You say that will come back to bite me because I believe its conditional upon who believes but that is absurd. The subjunctive allows for the condition even if you translate "pas" as "all." And look at the text, it gives the condition for the subjunctive in the next verse: "And this is life eternal, that they may know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

No, it was your pitiful attempt to ignore the subjunctive in this text. You never dealt with the subjunctive you just seem to argue it doens't exist. The FACT is that it does exist and you haven't dealt with it.

But notice how I prefaced this argument: I said this is one viable translation. I believe that "those God gave" is a reference to his apostles and the use of the subjunctive is there because one of those apostles doesn't not receive eternal life as explained later in this passage. Either way we as Arminians translate this passage it works, but no matter how you twist it the subjunctive makes it impossible for you to interpret "as many as given by God" as being the elect of Calvinism's teachings, because they may not recieve eternal life.

You tried pulling this same argument when I pointed out the subjunctive in Romans 11:32: "For God has imprisoned all in disobedience, so that He may have mercy on all."

Notice the word "may" in this verse also indicates the subjunctive. You explained this away by saying that the subjunctive was just saying God's binding all over to disobeidence gave God the ability to have mercy on all the elect. But if that were the case Paul wouldn't have used the subjunctive because it indicates it may or may not happen, he would have used the word "can" or "enable."

It's like the thing our teachers used to say when we would ask, "Can I go get a drink?" And they say, "I don't know CAN you?" Then they tell you the correct word is MAY not CAN. "Can" has to do with ability, while may has to do with the possiblity of it happening. The subjunctive in both of these verses destroy the Calvinistic assumptions.