SPIRITUALIZED GASLIGHTING
by Dr. Leighton Flowers
According to psychological experts “gaslighting” is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, hoping to make them question their own perception of reality.
SOME Calvinists argue that we are all born believing in the basic freedom of human will, the ability to make choices. But, then they argue that perception of reality is false and that God is actually controlling all our preferences and thus our choices (under their definition of “sovereignty”).
If one attempts to disagree they are often made to feel as if they are crazy, heretical, or just too ignorant to really understand. I believe this is a form of “spiritualized gaslighting.”
It comes in the form of statements like, “You just don’t understand Calvinism,” even after reading directly from a quote of John Calvin himself.
Or a statement like, “Yes it’s actually your choice,” after they just argued that God is the decisive cause (determiner) of every desire and choice that has ever been made.
If one objects to the apparent contradiction of such claims they are painted as an ignorant and/or rebellious person who just won’t “accept the plain reading of scripture” even though Biblical scholars have disagreed over these interpretations for generations.
If one says “that doesn’t make sense” or “that doesn’t seem right” then they are told something like “God’s thoughts are not our thoughts, our ways are not his ways, we cannot hope to fully comprehend God. Who are you, oh man, to answer back to God?” to make you doubt your own God-given sense of reason or objective moral values. Requesting that Christians ought to adhere to a soteriology that refrains from making God rationally contradictory or a moral hypocrite is not the same as attempting to fully understand the divine.
Do not allow yourself to be gaslighted. We are born with the perception of free will (responsibility) because that’s how God created us.
ED says, that ignorance of the Law of Moses will excuse the Gentiles!
AMCM:
BUT the scriptures say:
The CONTEXT of this is one of sin, Judgment, and eternal condemnation! (Rom. 2:5-6)
“But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who “will render to each one according to his deeds”:
– Paul then immediately goes on to include both Jew and Gentile in this judgment! And then makes clear that the Gentiles who have sinned without the Law, will perish without of the Law. (Rom. 2:11-12) – Saying;
“For there is no partiality with God.
For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;”
I rest my case on both scripture and the context of this passage, that the word “perish” above, means eternal condemnation!
Aidan,
Dude, PAHLEASE…you didn’t REST anything.
HOW MANY times do I gotta say “THOSE NOT UNDER THE LAW, SIN IS NOT IMPUTED., ROMANS 4:8.
And I can SHOW MANY VERSES that states so. But all you see is SIN SIN SIN SIN SIN.
YES, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED. BUT NOT EVERYONE HAS THAT KNOWLEDGE, AND FOR THOSE WHO DON’T SIN IS NOT IMPUTED, FOR WE ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW, AND NEITHER WAS ABRAHAM.
So please, ROMANS 4:8, 15, Romans 5:13 1 John 3:9, and….DEAD PEOPLE CAN’T SIN.
Jeeeeessssshshhhhhhh man, LISTEN.
Ed Chapman
Context please! Why don’t you try and explain those verses from the context instead of rattling off your ASSERTIONS!
I did, but I already did that many years ago. But I also have been spending the last few hours DEBUNKING your meaning of them.
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.
Romans 2 that you quote SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT Gentiles NOT UNDER THE LAW (THEY NEVER WERE TO BEGIN WITH), ARE NOT JUDGED BY THE LAW WHEN THEY DIE A NATURAL DEATH.
HOW in God’s name do you come up with something different is beyond me.
NO…..PERISH DOES NOT MEAN ETERNAL CONDEMNATION.
All it means is DIE.
There is BOTH, SPIRITUAL DEATH, AND NATURAL DEATH.
The context is what defines SPIRITUAL OR NATURAL.
The wages of sin is DEATH, and WAGES ARE WORKS, AND WORKS IS THE LAW OF MOSES.
That is SPIRITUAL DEATH (THE CONDEMNATION YOU SPEAK OF)
BUt in the ROMANS 2 that is NATURAL DEATH, not spiritual death.
Ed Chapman
Again, instead of ranting and raving, why don’t you show it from the context?
I have been, you are not listening.
Aidan
You had said:
“That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! That the Ungodly today don’t need to repent, because they won’t be lost, for they only sinned outside the Law.”
My response;
YOU ARE DOG GONE RIGHT I DO.
Why?
THEY DIDN’T HAVE THE LAW OF MOSES TELLING THEM THAT THEY WERE EVIL.
1 Peter 3:19
18 Christ also suffered once for sins. The one who did what is right suffered for those who don’t do right. He suffered to bring you to God. His body was put to death. But the Holy Spirit brought him back to life. 19 After that, Christ went and made an announcement to the spirits in prison. 20 Long ago these spirits did not obey. That was when God was patient while Noah was building the ark. And only a few people went into the ark. In fact, there were only eight. Those eight people were saved through water.
I really am getting frustrated at not only your lack of knowledge, but your refusal to listen to REASONING FROM THE SCRITPURES.
You are unteachable. I noticed that from the beginning when I read your stuff, a NOVICE, but wanting to TEACH.
But, to each his own. SEE YA!
Ed Chapman
ED, wrote:
Aidan
You had said:
“That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! That the Ungodly today don’t need to repent, because they won’t be lost, for they only sinned outside the Law.”
AMCM: No, Ed, that’s what you teach. The scriptures teach the opposite to this!
Aidan states:
“AMCM: No, Ed, that’s what you teach. The scriptures teach the opposite to this!”
No, Jesus died for the UNGODLY, and Jesus went to preach to the spirits in PRISON (abraham’s bosom), the UNGODLY THAT HE DIED FOR.
Hello?
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
By YOUR interpretation of SCRIPTURE, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED, and judged to hell, AND Jesus DID NOT DIE for the UNGODLY, but for the RIGHTEOUS, and the ONLY RIGHTEOUS are but a handful of people from the OT times, and everyone else, BURNING IN HELL.
So, HELL has more people than heaven ever will, because NO ONE outside of Abraham, and a few others had FAITH. EVERYONE ELSE, ungodly, judged to HELL, and why? They didn’t have FAITH.
So, no, I don’t buy into your logic at all. Jesus died for the UNGODLY.
Ed Chapman
Ed,
Your view has all of the Jews being saved! Then anyone ignorant outside of the Law of Moses being saved, which according to you is most everyone.
With your view we are going to have most people saved. And quite a lot of them being wicked people! Hell is going to be pretty empty as far as you are concerned!
We are going to have a lot of evil people in heaven according to your doctrine.
Looks like – now the narrow way is to hell! huh!!
Aidan,
You had said that my view is that ALL of the Jews will be saved.
NOT QUITE.
The Pharisees asked Jesus if THEY WERE BLIND. Jesus responds, IF YOU WERE BLIND, YOU SHOULD HAVE NO SIN, BUT NOW YOU SAY THAT YOU SEE, THEREFORE, YOUR SINS REMAIN.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “AND Jesus DID NOT DIE for the UNGODLY,”
Romans 5, “when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly…God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”
Amen to that, rhutchin.
Aidan,
You had said:
“BUT the scriptures say:
The CONTEXT of this is one of sin, Judgment, and eternal condemnation! (Rom. 2:5-6)
“But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: ”
THAT is in the CONTEXT of those UNDER THE LAW…ROMANS 4:15.
DEEDS IS A WORD RELATED TO THE PHRASE “DEEDS OF THE LAW”, THEREFORE, THOSE UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES.
I quote Romans 4:15 ONE MORE TIME…
Romans 4:15 King James Version (KJV)
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression (lawlessness).
1 John 3:4
sin is the transgression (your bible states, “lawlessness”) of the law.
but..NOTICE the word WRATH in the previous verse. NO LAW, NO WRATH.
So, where there is law, there is wrath. DEEDS, is DO, DO IS WORKS. WORKS IS LAW OF MOSES.
Gotta learn them words, buddy. Sesame Street might help.
Ed Chapman
Why don’t you try and quote that stuff in context and see if that helps?
Also, why don’t you acknowledge that Paul includes the Gentiles in Romans 2?
Guess that doesn’t suit your false doctrine!
Aidan,
NO, it’s YOUR false doctrine.
WINK IGNORANCE, NO LAW, SIN NOT IMPUTED, CAN’T SIN.
You just don’t want to DO THE HOMEWORK. I’ve already been there, done that.
It would take me 2 YEARS to TEACH you, regarding the CONTEXT that you wish me to present.
But simplified, is my 2 cents worth of KNOWLEDGE right in those above words, capitalized. I can’t do YOUR homework FOR you. It’s something that YOU have to discover on your own.
The HUGE difference between THE LAW OF MOSES FOR THE JEWS, and NO LAW OF MOSES for everyone else.
Ed Chapman
ED Teaches: OUTSIDE OF THE LAW OF MOSES, NO SIN IMPUTED, even tho, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED. That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! That the Ungodly today don’t need to repent, because they won’t be lost, for they only sinned outside the Law.
AMCM:
BUT here’s what the bible teaches about these Ungodly.
Take note of the fate of the Ungodly! (2 Pet. 2: 4-9)
For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; Notice, the angels who sinned are in hell, in chains reserved for “judgment.”
and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; In judgment against them, God destroyed the world of the “Ungodly.”
and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; Again, God “condemned them to destruction,” – as an example to the “Ungodly.”
and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked
(for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)— But righteous Lot was delivered.
then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment. – The ‘unrighteous’ are due to be punished on the day of judgment!
Note the ultimate end of the Ungodly: (2 Pt. 3:7)
“But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”
But God doesn’t want anyone to “Perish” (2 Pt. 3:9)
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
Truly the world is lost and perishing! (Jn 3:16)
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
And God is calling “all” to repent before Judgment Day comes! (Acts 17:30-31)
“Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,
“because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”
On the basis of scripture and context, I rest my case.
Aidan
You state:
“That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! ”
My response:
Romans 5:6
…Christ died for the ungodly.
Acts 17:30
And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
ED, wrote:
Aidan
You state:
“That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! ”
AMCM:
Again, you seem to be so confused! That’s what you believe, not me!
Why should I be surprised that you keep misquoting me, because that’s precisely what you keep doing with the scriptures.
Aidan,
that was a cut and paste of a partial statement that you made. Sorry, I only picked that up from YOU.
My point was, the UNGODLY is who JESUS died for, and they were UNGODLY, and JESUS DID GO PREACH TO THEM, ACCORDING TO THE EPISTLE OF PETER. Ya skip right over that stuff when trying to prove your points.
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE WORD “WINK” (in your reference, you state, “OVERLOOKED”) IS IMPLYING?
DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE WORD “IGNROANCE” IS IMPLYING?
God OVERLOOKED the IGNORANCE. NOT JUDGED.
NOT JUDGED. NOT JUDGED. OVERLOOKED, WINKED.
But all you see is ETERNAL DAMNATION.
WOW. You truly amuse me. You quote the verse, but OVERLOOK it’s meaning (Acts 17:30)
Ed Chapman
You’re like Judge Dredd! THE LAW! THE LAW!
Give it up DR-ED!
Aidan,
Actually, I am REALLY saying “NO LAW, NO LAW, NO LAW”. The only ones under the law, are JEWS.
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
I’m done with this conversation. You go ahead and preach eternal damnation, and that you can lose your salvation.
What we call the latter part of Romans 7 is the SANCTIFICATION PROCESS, where you will STILL SIN as a Christian, but OVER TIME, GOD works in YOU FROM THE INSIDE OUT. But the only thing you see is the OUTSIDE, you judge a book by it’s cover, NOT REALIZING that PEOPLE STRUGGLE with sin, and in that STRUGGLE, you conclude that they LOST their salvation.
Well, you go ahead and point fingers and judge people, even Christians struggling, condemning them to hell, alledging that they LOST their salvation.
Ed Chapman
Then Aidan states:
“That the Ungodly today don’t need to repent, because they won’t be lost, for they only sinned outside the Law.”
CHILDREN ARE NOT UNGODLY AND HAVE NO NEED TO REPENT OF ANYTHING, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY MAY, OR MAY NOT HAVE SINNED.
THAT is the context of what I was discussing, for they have NO KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.
KNOWLEDGE IS KEY. without knowledge no one is guilty of anything.
Once they get KNOWLEDGE, THEN they are held accountable, HENCE, ROMANS 2:14-16 (law written in their heart).
Do you really think that babies have KNOWLEDGE of good and evil when they do something EVIL? THINK, MAN, THINK.
Romans 2:14-16 are those who have a CONSCIENCE…CONSCIENCE…CONSCIENCE.
THOSE PEOPLE ARE JUDGED BASED ON THEIR CONSCIENCE, NOT THE LAW OF MOSES, WHEN THEY…PERISH (DIE).
But children have NO CONSCIENCE.
You got some LEARNIN TO DO.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
Then Aidan states:
“That the Ungodly today don’t need to repent, because they won’t be lost, for they only sinned outside the Law.”
AMCM: Oh! Ed! You really are confused with my doctrine and yours! That’s what you believe, above, not me. I teach the opposite.
And there you go again bringing children into it again! What have you against children? You are the one calling them UNGODLY, NOT ME! I don’t know what you have against them?
And there you go again, twisting Romans 2 into what you want to make it, instead of just letting the context speak for itself! And, changing the meaning of words, namely, “perish” to make it fit your view? Bad taste!
What you are saying is such GOBBLEDYGOOK it defies belief!
John 3:16 the world is perishing Ed, perishing! Get your head out of the sand!
I think I’m done with this, bye!
Aidan,
No, you are the one who teaches the false doctrine that you can lose your salvation. Not me.
So, since you think I discuss babies too much, WHEN are BABIES to be BAPTIZED (saved)?
Ed
Aidan,
And it is you who does not put context into Romans 2. MOST of the book of Romans is DISTINGUISHING the difference between those UNDER THE LAW vs THOSE NOT UNDER THE LAW.
But the way you present it, it’s as if EVERYONE is under the law.
Ed
Aidan,
what the SEAL of the HOLY SPIRIT is all about. Couple that with the book of Hebrews, “I WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU NOR FORSAKE YOU”.
NEVER NEVER NEVER.
Some might say that you can leave him. NOPE…HE WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU NOR FORSAKE YOU. WHEREEVER YOU GO, THERE HE IS.
For those NOT SAVED IN THE FIRST PLACE, JESUS STATES, “I NEVER KNEW YOU”.
Ed Chapman
Hi Ed,
I removed some of this text on this post that went a little to far in being personal.
Aidan,
You PROBABLY do not KNOW THIS, but PETER’S epistles are TO THE JEWS ONLY in CONVERSATION…
You had said:
Note the ultimate end of the Ungodly: (2 Pt. 3:7)
“But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”
“But God doesn’t want anyone to “Perish” (2 Pt. 3:9)
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. ”
My response to that:
PUT THIS IN CONTEXT. HERE IS THE CONTEXT:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
———————
CONTEXT #1:
LAST DAYS
CONTEXT #2
SCOFFERS (WHO ARE THE SCOFFERS).
CONTEXT #3
THE FATHERS (THOSE FATHERS WERE NEVER THE FATHERS OF GENTILES) ARE JEWS.
The ONES that Peter is discussing here, are the UNBELIEVING JEWS, awaiting the FIRST APPEARANCE of the Messiah that they ALREADY MISSED, AND IT IS THEY WHO ARE SCOFFING.
Finally, verse 7 is discussing REVELATION, AFTER RAPTURE, BECAUSE IT IS THEN THAT…
IT’S ALL GONNA BURN.
1st it was a FLOOD, BUT IN THE END, IT’S ALL GONNA BURN..THE EARTH AND THE HEAVENS, AND THOSE LEFT FOR ARMEGEDDON.
THAT’S WHAT YOUR VERSE 7 AND 9 IS ALL ABOUT…THE LAST DAYS, WHICH YOU THINK HAS ALREADY COME AND GONE ALREADY.
—————————————–
Bottom line, Aidan, you misuse scripture, not even knowing what the TIME LINE is in the discussion, or who is being discussed, and why. Until you READ THE BIBLE AS A NOVEL, you will NEVER GET IT, BUT will continue in making erroneous conclusions based on a false narrative, forcing verses to say something that they were never meant to say.
The scoffers are UNBELIEVING JEWS. The audience of the epistle are believing Jews. Topic…LATTER DAYS, which for some weird reason, you think that already happened in Acts 2.
Ed Chapman
The bible is something you need to study Ed, and not just read it as a novel!
And there you go again, asserting all sorts of things about 2 Peter to twist it into some kind of contortion! It would be much simpler if you just stopped ignoring the context. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have to twist words like “Repentance” and “Perish” in order to apply it to a purely physical death.
The context of the whole passage clearly makes it refer to ‘eternal condemnation’! That’s why the “Ungodly” need to repent; God doesn’t want them to perish, aka (eternal condemnation)!
All you have to do Ed is study the context, and then follow it.
DON’T JUST TREAT AS A NOVEL-TY.
Pot/kettle. Dude, I’ve been there, done that. Studied many many years. Look at my blog site.
In order to study, you must FIRST read it as a novel. I’d suggest a minimum of five times. That’s what I did.
My views are not just my own. My church, and I attend more than one, does, and many Christians I hang out with, too. Many denominations preach it, too, so, you are out of step with many in Christendom.
You have a religious background of already taught doctrine.
I didn’t. I have an advantage because of that. And to know that many churches teach what I learned, that’s vindication of knowing that I know what I’m talking about.
And that’s the reason I have the guts to go head on with theologians, such as Simon, and others, too. Especially the people who believe in any form of TULIP. All of it.
Ed Chapman
ED: “Many denominations preach it, too, so, you are out of step with many in Christendom.”
AMCM: I doubt that many denominations preach that the wicked don’t need to repent! Or that most are going to heaven including the ungodly! But that’s not what matters in the end. The bible certainly never taught that, and neither did Jesus.
You are the one “out of step” with the teaching of God’s word!
Aidan,
You had said:
: I doubt that many denominations preach that the wicked don’t need to repent! Or that most are going to heaven including the ungodly! But that’s not what matters in the end. The bible certainly never taught that, and neither did Jesus.
You are the one “out of step” with the teaching of God’s word!”
My response:
I never said any of that. I said that without KNOWLEDGE of what to repent FROM, no one can repent…so, as Galatians states, THE LAW IS OUR SCHOOLMASTER TO BRING US TO CHRIST, so THEN they know what to repent from.
Romans 7:7
I had NOT KNOWN SIN BUT BY THE LAW
Romans 3:20
For by the law is the knowledge of sin
And since FOR ALL HAVE SINNED, then ABRAHAM WAS WICKED, but, that wicked Abraham had no KNOWLEDGE of sin
Romans 5:13, Romans 4:15
But you completely ignore those scriptures.
Continuing on with Galatians, once you are IN CHRIST, you are NO LONGER UNDER THE LAW, and…
1 John 3:9
You cannot SIN, meaning, you cannot lose your salvation NO MATTER WHAT SIN that you sin (latter part of Romans 7, STRUGGLING WITH SIN).
Only the hardcore reform people preach HELLFIRE and BRIMSTONE to the CONGREGATION, teaching them that they can lose their salvation.
The seal of the Holy Spirit, once you have that, GOD WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU, NOR FORSAKE YOU. You are IN THE FAMILY, and Jesus did teach that whoever the father gives him, THEY STAY.
Ed Chapman
You have a twisted view of the word, perish, as if it only pertains to eternal condemnation. It doesn’t.
ED wrote:
“You have a twisted view of the word, perish, as if it only pertains to eternal condemnation. It doesn’t.”
AMCM:
No I haven’t, and you probably already know that! But you have twisted it to mean only physical death in passages that are dealing with the loss of true, or eternal life e.g (Rom 2:12; 2 Pt 3:9) And by implication, John 3:16.
Do you believe “perish” in John 3:16 is mere physical loss?
You can’t repent of something you have no knowledge of.
But for some weird REASON, you seem to think people already know what to repent from without knowledge?
Paul said he had NOT KNOWN SIN BUT BY THREE LAW, and Romans 3:20 states, FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.
But you want people to repent without that knowledge?
Twilight Zone!
ED wrote: “But you want people to repent without that knowledge?”
AMCM:
It’s not me that is calling them to repent, it’s God:
God..”now commands all men everywhere to repent,” (Acts 17:30)
Aidan,
You quote:
“ED wrote: “But you want people to repent without that knowledge?”
AMCM:
It’s not me that is calling them to repent, it’s God:
God..”now commands all men everywhere to repent,” (Acts 17:30)”
My response:
THIS IS COMMICAL. You completely IGNORE the words PRIOR TO the word, “NOW” in Acts 17:30.
Why is that?
I know…so that you can CONTINUE with the argument that the WICKED NEVER REPENTED, right?
This is how FALSE teachers do it, by LEAVING OUT IMPORTANT INFORMATION.
That is DISHONEST on your part.
Ed Chapmsn
No! But you said that it was ME who wanted them to repent.
I was just answering that specific question, that no – it is God who is calling ALL MEN EVERYWHERE TO REPENT! (Acts 17:30).
Something you keep ignoring!
No, you can’t repent until you first have knowledge of what to repent from. You keep ignoring that.
Part one of evangelizing is, THE SCHOOLMASTER…AKA THE LAW.
That’s in Galatians.
Without that schoolmaster, no one can repent, because they have no KNOWLEDGE of what they did wrong.
I feel sorry for the new people that come to your church, preacher demands then to repent, and they say, “FROM WHAT?”
THAT’S FUNNY.
ED
ED, wrote:
No, you can’t repent until you first have knowledge of what to repent from. You keep ignoring that.
AMCM:
And, you keep ignoring the fact that Romans 1 shows that men (not just the Jews) have plenty to repent of.
ED wrote:
“I feel sorry for the new people that come to your church, preacher demands then to repent, and they say, “FROM WHAT?”
“THAT’S FUNNY.”
AMCM:
Jesus told His disciples: In Luke 24:46-47;
v.46 “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,
v.47 “and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”
And then Ed, turns around and says, “WHAT? – REPENTANCE to be preached TO ALL NATIONS?- BUT REPENTANCE FROM WHAT?”
NOW! THAT’S FUNNY.
Are you going to contradict the Lord? If so, that isn’t the least bit funny!
No….that ROMANS 1 regards the Jews under the law, for only the Jews would have that kind of knowledge of God and his judgments. No one else.
When you study, you will see that. Until then, you think Romans 1 is discussing all mankind.
Ed Chapman
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, (Rom 1:18-20)
I think you would have a hard time proving that “only the Jews would have that kind of knowledge of God!”
When you study, perhaps you will realise that the bible is more than a novel to skip through.
The wrath of God, huh?
Romans 4:15, because the LAW works WRATH, where NO LAW IS, THERE IS NO TRANSGRESSION…meaning..NO WRATH.
STOP quoting scripture until you read the bible first.
Ed Chapman
STOP reading the bible like a novel, until you can quote scripture in context first.
Romans 1 is discussing those who already know God. Three JEWS. That chapter is not discussing GENTILES, for they didn’t know ANYTHING about God at the time of that letter.
Ed Chapman
Hmmm! I think you’ll find it difficult to prove that because of vss 19-20!
chapmaned24 writes, “Romans 1 is discussing those who already know God. Three JEWS. That chapter is not discussing GENTILES, for they didn’t know ANYTHING about God at the time of that letter.”
Romans 1, “Paul,…called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God…To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:…Now I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that I often planned to come to you (but was hindered until now), that I might have some fruit among you also, just as among the other Gentiles. I am a debtor both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to wise and to unwise. So, as much as is in me, I am ready to preach the gospel to you who are in Rome also. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.”
Paul begins by telling those in Rome, “that I might have some fruit among you also, just as among the other Gentiles.” The term, “other gentiles,” tells us that Paul writes to gentiles. Paul then begins his argument speaking to gentiles, “the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.”
Romans 2 continues Paul’s argument including gentiles, “Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.” This continues when Paul identifies both Jews and gentiles together, “tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.”
Paul writes to “those who already know God.” This includes gentiles and Jews.
rhutchin,
I disagree with your conclusions. The Jews were the ONLY ONES who KNEW things of God that your average Gentile didn’t have a clue about.
Romans 1:21
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Those were the JEWS.
THEY KNEW GOD. Gentiles did not.
Verse 28
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,
Verse 32
32 Who knowing the judgment of God.
Now, I’m home now, but I was at work doing all this stuff from Bible MEMORY, because I know the scritpures, I know the verses, I know where to look, because long before the internet, all I had was a bible and a Strong’s concordance. I SPENT YEARS reading and reading and memorizin, and memorizing and reading. I know this stuff.
This is why it amazes me, and AMUSES me, that Dr. so and so, or Theologian this and that does NOT KNOW what I know, but tell me that I am a heretic. LET THEM CALL ME A HERETIC. They can’t kill me. But let them kill me anyway. I’ll be in heaven just that much quicker.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “Romans 1:21
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Those were the JEWS.
THEY KNEW GOD. Gentiles did not.”
What does Romans 1, say, “since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,…” This involves gentiles and that situation continues down to today.. So, how do you conclude that only the Jews are in view here given that Jews, as an unique qnd identifiable group of people, did not come into existence until much later after the creation?
rhutchin,
The word, “THEY” is NOT MANKIND, but the JEWS. Ask an ATHEIST if INVISIBLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD ARE CLEARLY SEEN, and see what they say. This does NOT INVOLVE Gentiles. I know, I know, you people always DEFAULT to FOR THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE…ya, right. That’s ONLY THOSE “IN CHRIST”, not outside of Christ. The WHOLE CHAPTER 1 deals with the JEWS. Not Gentiles. But, read what ya want out of it. I don’t read what you read.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
When you put YOUR VERSION of Romans 1, rergarding the INVISIBLE ATTTRIBUTES, and the USE of the word, THEY, and read THE REST OF THE STORY in Romans 1, you will SEE, that the word THEY has a CONTEXT of JEWS ONLY, who are WITHOUT EXCUSE, etc., etc. etc.
THEY THEY THEY.
Verse 18 (KJV)
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
The Jews HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS
Verse 19
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
God is MANIFEST IN THE JEWS, FOR GOD SHOWED IT UNTO THE JEWS
Verse 20
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
THE JEWS ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE
Verse 21
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
The Jews knew God, but didn’t glorify him as God, the Jews were not thankful.
Verse 22
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
The Jews professed to be wise, the Jews became fools
Verse 23 and the rest…all describe THE JEWS ONLY.
How you can interpret this as ANYTHINNG OTHER THAN JEWS is beyond me. The word, “THEY” has a context of JEWS ONLY.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “The Jews HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS”
“…all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men…” The phrase, “…of men…” encompasses Jews and gentiles.
Verse 19
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Then, “God is MANIFEST IN THE JEWS, FOR GOD SHOWED IT UNTO THE JEWS.”
The phrase, “known of God…God hath shewed it unto them,” is accomplished by “…the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen….” and the term, “creation,” identifies all people, not just Jews. All, both Jew and gentiles, are without excuse.
Then, “The Jews knew God, but didn’t glorify him as God, the Jews were not thankful.’
God is known by His invisible things from the creation – thus, all people from the creation onward prior to the Jews coming on the scene.
So far, you state your personal opinion that only Jews are in view. What is your argument from Romans 1 to limit Paul to just the Jews?
rhutchin,
You state that it is my PERSONAL opinion.
NO. It’s a FACT. Jews ONLY.
Just like THIS ONE:
Romans 2:
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
The word, “YOU” has a CONTEXT, NOT GENTILE, BUT JEW.
The word, “CIRCUMCISION” is JEW.
Paul is showing that the JEWS PREACH “DON’T STEAL”, BUT THEY BREAK THE LAW AND STEAL, blaspheming God TO US GENTILES.
It’s NOT MY OPINION. It’s fact, if you would OPEN YOUR EYES. Maybe God needs to OPEN YOUR HEART? Give you eyes to see?
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “You state that it is my PERSONAL opinion. NO. It’s a FACT. Jews ONLY.”
It is your opinion until you show from the Scriptures that it is true. So far, you have not done that.
Then, ‘Romans 2:
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written…
The word, “YOU” has a CONTEXT, NOT GENTILE, BUT JEW.”
When “you” is paired against “gentiles,” the meaning becomes obvious. You keep ignoring the wording in Romans 1, and I think we both understand why that is.
rhutchin,
You keep telling me that it is only my opinion, and that I have not proven anything.
I have proven it. You reject it. FINE.
You are blind.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin states:
“When “you” is paired against “gentiles,” the meaning becomes obvious. You keep ignoring the wording in Romans 1, and I think we both understand why that is.”
My response:
Looks like I touched a NERVE in rhutchin. I’ve NEVER seen you come on strong like this against ANYTHING that opposes Calvinism like THIS COMMENT before from you.
Interesting!!!!!!
Ed Chapman
RH, I agree with your view on this.
GENERAL REVELATION: (Psalms 19)
The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament shows His handiwork.
Day unto day utters speech,
And night unto night reveals knowledge.
There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard.
Their line has gone out through all the earth,
And their words to the end of the world.
In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun,
Which is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber,
And rejoices like a strong man to run its race.
Its rising is from one end of heaven,
And its circuit to the other end;
And there is nothing hidden from its heat.
SPECIAL REVELATION: (Psalms 19)
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul;
The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple;
The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart;
The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes;
The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever;
The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold,
Yea, than much fine gold;
Sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
Moreover by them Your servant is warned,
And in keeping them there is great reward.
Who can understand his errors?
Cleanse me from secret faults.
Keep back Your servant also from presumptuous sins;
Let them not have dominion over me.
Then I shall be blameless,
And I shall be innocent of great transgression.
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
Be acceptable in Your sight,
O LORD, my strength and my Redeemer.
rhutchin and Aidan,
We gotta also remember, it was MOSES who PENNED the words about creation, and Moses was all about, THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, not those outside of themselves.
Think of it this way: We do hear a LOT of talk by “some” fringe people about…THE BOOK OF ENOCH.
Think about that for a moment. Enoch was BEFORE the flood. If there really is such a book, then that book would have had to have been passed down to Noah to take with him on the Ark.
Then after Noah got off the ark, that book would have had to have been passed down to Abraham. How did Abraham get this book?
If Noah didn’t have that book, then the flood would have destroyed it.
Anyway, my point is all this was that Moses is the one who taught the Children of Israel about the creation, about Adam and Eve, and the history up to their present day, to also include the BIRTH of the person penning Genesis.
If creation was COMMON KNOWLEDGE, even to US, without that book, WE ALSO would be IGNORANT OF…
Romans 1:21
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
WE NEED THE BOOK OF GENESIS to understand that there was a creation, and that God is the one who created. We would know NOTHING about the “INVISIBLE” anything…without that book…a book that was ONLY FOR THE JEWS at that time.
Aidan, what you quoted in Pslams mentions
1. The Law of the Lord
2. The Statutes
3. The Commandments
4. The Judgments
SPECIAL REVELATION: (Psalms 19)
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul;
The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple;
The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart;
The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes;
The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever;
The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.
This is why I mentioned:
Psalms 147:
19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.
20 He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.
My point…
Gentiles Godless
Jews knew
Knowledge of God was given to the Jews, but not the Gentiles.
For there is a difference between Jew and Gentile.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin and Aidan,
Romans 3:1-2
1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Psalm 147:19-20 King James Version (KJV)
19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.
20 He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.
chapmaned24 writes, “19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.”
What does that have to do with Romans 1 and “…since the creation…”?
rhutchin,
You state:
“chapmaned24 writes, “19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.”
What does that have to do with Romans 1 and “…since the creation?
My response:
First off, regarding the word CREATION, I wish you would READ THE REST OF THE STORY and PUT THE WORD, “THEY” INITO PLAY HERE, because THAT WORD “THEY” IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SENTENCE, THAT THE JEWS ARE THE “THEY” WITHOUT EXCUSE.
NEXT…
The Psalms reference that I provided has EVERYTHING to do with what I am saying, because the GENTILES were never given ANY knowledge of God. NONE.
Peter even states this:
Acts 10:28
And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;
The Jews did NOT KNOW that THEIR GOD was GOING TO BE (Jesus told John, “I have other sheep”) for the Gentiles, too. They always thought that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob belonged to them, and them alone.
So GENTILES DO NOT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY DID, EVEN REGARDING THE INVISIBLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD IN CREATION…………BUT, YOU DIDN’T FINISH THE SENTENCE REGARDING THE WORD “THEY”.
Did you take English class in high school regarding the USAGE of pronouns, and subjects, and sentence structure? I sure don’t see evidence of that.
Ed Chapman
rhutich,
THEN we move on over to chapter 2.
I’m sorry if you can’t see it, but that chapter is DISTINGUISHING the difference between those UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES, that is, the JEWS, and the rest of us GENTILES who are NOT under the law of Moses, AND….NEVER WERE TO BEGIN WITH.
That’s chapter 2 of Romans.
It is the JEWS that wish to judge the GENTILES based on the LAW of Moses, but Paul is basically saying, “Uh, NOT SO FAST!”.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “I’m sorry if you can’t see it, but that chapter is DISTINGUISHING the difference between those UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES, that is, the JEWS, and the rest of us GENTILES who are NOT under the law of Moses, AND….NEVER WERE TO BEGIN WITH.
That’s chapter 2 of Romans.”
Romans 2 begins “Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge,…” the term, “O man,” points us to any man, Jew or gentile.
Later, “God…will render to each one according to his deeds…to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness–indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.” The phrase, “to the Jew first and also to the Greek” points us Paul speaking of all people, Jew or gentile.
Then, “as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law,..” The phrase, “for when Gentiles,” points us to gentiles.
In v17, we read, “Indeed you are called a Jew,…” Paul now addresses the Jews specifically. However, here, we see, “he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.” So, Paul makes a distinction that he will come back to in Romans 9 – there are Jews by physical descent and Jews by spiritual descent (children of promise).
In chapter 3, Paul addresses Jews and tells them that they are no different than gentiles for “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” Then, “is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also,”
Paul is not distinguishing those under the law (Jews) from those not under the law (gentiles), but is arguing that all both Jews and gentiles are in the same boat – they are both sinners in need of salvation.
rhutchin,
That’s STILL about the Jews, “oh man”. It is about the Jews JUDGING the Gentiles BY THE LAW OF MOSES.
The “O MAN” is a reference to THE JEWS, not the Gentiles.
The law of Moses discusses “THOU SHALT NOT STEAL”.
The Law of Christ DOES NOT.
The Law of Christ teaches, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.
If you are loving your neighbor, then there is no need to OBSERVE a commandment of, “THOU SHALT NOT STEAL”.
There is a DISTINCTION between the Law of Moses for the Jews, vs. EVERYONE ELSE in THAT ROMANS 2, as well as Romans 1, as well as Romans 3, as well as MOST OF THE BOOK OF ROMANS, teaching us a DISTICTION between the two.
DISTINCTION.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “The “O MAN” is a reference to THE JEWS, not the Gentiles.”
That is a point on which we disagree. I don’t see it excluding the gentiles and I don’t see anything in the preceding context – from which Paul says, “Therefore…” – that would lead to that conclusion. If Paul had meant to speak only of the Jews at this point, he could have made that clear by saying, “Therefore you are inexcusable, O Jew,…” That Paul uses the term, “man,” points to a broader context – that of all people both Jew and gentile. So, we disagree. You can go your way and I will go mine.
rhutchin,
Yes, this is indeed where we part ways. You pick a verse or two to conclude things. I read the WHOLE LETTER OF ROMANS, and THEN go back and section it out for TOPICS of the CONVERSATION, and when you do, it is CLEAR that he is discussing the DIFFERENCES between Jew and Gentile, and the ONLY relation is…FOR ALL HAVE SINNED.
Romans 4:15, 8, Romans 5:13.
Abraham had NO KNOWLEDGE of SIN (Romans 3:20, for by the law is the knowledge of sin), and therefore, he had NOTHING to REPENT of…yet, for all have sinned. Abraham didn’t REPENT of anything.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
Here’s the BOTTOM LINE of the book of Romans:
Jesus was JUDGED for our sins, past, present and future. We don’t need to CRUCIFY Christ Jesus againi and again and again. He was already judged. WE WON’T BE JUDGED FOR OUR SINS, since Jesus already was.
For those who HEAR of Jesus, and THEN afer that, reject Jesus, THEY will be judged by…THE LAW OF MOSES.
And THAT is the reason for the DISTINCTION between Jew and Gentile, and for those Jews who acknowledge Jesus as Savior, THEN there is no difference between Jew and Gentile.
However, due to the BLINDNESS of the AVERAGE JEW (PAUL WHEN HE WAS SAUL)…
John 9:39-41 King James Version (KJV)
39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
Hence, ROMANS 9-11
Blind Jews have NO SIN, even tho, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED. Those who say, “WE SEE”, their sins REMAIN.
This is the difference between those who read THE REST OF THE STORY vs. those who pick a few verses to make false doctrines, aka Calvinism.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
And when you put all that together, you see that this is all related to, and comes on the heal of…
Pharisees (Jews), which BELIEVED:
Acts 15:5
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
Acts 15:24
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
And for those who think that the words, “keep the law” is ONLY equated to, “ceremonial”…think again.
Keep the law means, “THOU SHALT NOT STEAL”, etc.
Under Christ, it’s LOVE THEY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF.
The Jews were TROUBLING GENTILES with KEEP THE LAW…of Moses, as verse 5 indicates.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
As I have been saying FOR DAYS, YES, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED, but NO ONE can REPENT without KNOWLEDGE of what they did wrong, and without that KNOWLEDGE, then they are NOT JUDGED in the same manner as the JEWS who have that knowledge.
So, we MUST be introduced to…THE LAW (Galatians) as a SCHOOLMASTER, BEFORE even being INTRODUCED to, JESUS, because THE LAW (Schoolmaster) brings us TO CHRIST. Once we are “IN” Christ, WE ARE NO LONGER in need of THE SCHOOLMASTER (THE LAW).
And we are STILL not judged in the same manner as the Jews UNDER THE LAW when we sin. We weren’t BEFORE we knew, and we aren’t AFTER we come to Jesus.
In essence, we are ONLY UNDER THE LAW for a VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, to INTRODUCE US to JESUS. Once we are IN CHRIST, we are NO LONGER UNDER ANY CONDEMNATION…ever.
For where no law is, there is NO TRANSGRESSION (Romans 4:15). We are NOT UNDER THE LAW. Abraham wasn’t either. He was NEVER introduced to THE LAW, and yet, HE SINNED. He is indeed part of the “FOR ALL HAVE SINNED”, and he didn’t know anythying about his sin. And NO SIN was “imputed” to him, all because he didn’t have ANY KNOWLEDGE.
Every one of us goes thru the IGNORANCE of our own sin, and due to that IGNORANCE, sin is NOT IMPUTED to us, UNTIL we KNOW IT, but that still does NOT negate out, “FOR ALL HAVE SINNED”.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
You had said:
“Romans 2 begins “Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge,…” the term, “O man,” points us to any man, Jew or gentile. ”
My response:
The FIRST WORD, “therefore”, is a CLUE to GOT BACK to chapter 1, last verse where it states
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
“WHO KNOWING THE JUDGMENT OF GOD”
Gentiles didnt KNOW that!
Psalm 147:19-20 King James Version (KJV)
19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.
20 He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.
Conclusion:
It is the JEWS who are JUDGING the Gentiles, and therefore, O MAN is the Jews who are doing the JUDGING. Take it back to chapter 1, all because of the word, “THEREFORE”. You have to assertain who was being discussed prior to THEREFORE.
Gentiles did NOT have the KNOWLEDGE of the JUDGMENTS of God, but Jews do.
Ed Chapman
Ed,
The cosmos itself is a witness, David testifying that
“The heavens are telling of the glory of God; And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. Day to day pours forth speech, And night to night reveals knowledge.” (Psalm 19:1-2).
Likewise, Luke says that God left witness of Himself among “all the nations”…
“in the generations gone by He permitted all the nations to go their own ways and yet He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good and gave you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness.” (Acts 14:16-17)
And then Paul in (Romans 1:19-20) tells us that they are without excuse.
“because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.”
No one should read these passages and conclude that only the Jews were meant to see God in “General Revelation”. Paul says that God has been revealing Himself, “since the creation of the world.” How? “By the things that are made.” That means to all men. Luke says, He left witness of Himself – “to all nations.” David, “the heavens are telling of the glory of God”- “day to day pours forth speech.” There’s nowhere we can go to escape this witness of God.
In Isaiah God tells men to…
Lift up your eyes on high and see Who has created these stars. The One Who leads forth their host by number, He calls them all by name; because of the greatness of His might and the strength of His power not one of them is missing. (Isaiah 40:26)
I found this little thought:
“So without any Bible at all, human beings know that there is a God who is personal, moral, intelligent, eternal and powerful. And therefore even people who have never seen a Bible should bow to God and worship him and thank him. But this is not the normal response (Ro 1:21, 22, 23). This means that our primary spiritual problem is not intellectual (or lack of sufficient evidence), but moral (we want to rebel and be autonomous).”
Tell that to the atheists. They look at the universe, too.
Tell me, objectively, without that book, is that really the first thing that you concluded? Or, did someone plant the idea in your head from the words of genesis.
The book of genesis chapter 1 didn’t need to be written of we already had that knowledge.
Our spirit knows, that’s for sure. But our mind does not have that knowledge.
You have to remember the rest of the story, in that the Jews thought that their God was not for the Gentiles… including David, yet, by the spirit of God, he prophesied it.
Remember how Jesus was… he came to save HIS PEOPLE…The lost sheep of the house of Israel.
He did not come BUT FOR the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
When evangelizing, Jesus sent out 72 disciples, and specifically told them, don’t go to the Gentiles.
The Jews had plenty of reason to think that their God was never meant for the Gentiles.
Thousands of Jews were saved before Peter was ever told by God that Gentiles are welcomed.
Please be objective. This revelation is not something that is known, UNTIL you start reading, or hearing the words of THEIR GOD, which is our God, too.
We know God as Jesus, they don’t.
Try evangelizing a Jew. I had one once tell me that what Christians are doing is no different than what Hitler did to the Jews. Genocide. Our intention, pure as it may be, they reject Jesus for a reason. Here is a man, proclaiming to be God, and the Jews wanted to stone him for blasphemy.
Tell me, objectively, that you wouldn’t have participated in that stoning. I know I would have. Why? A man proclaiming to be God. That doesn’t sound weird to you?
We have to learn where the Jews are coming from, and have compassion and mercy towards them, as Romans 11 so states.
Yet, they were the ONLY ONES commanded by God to obey 613 burdensome commandments, called bondage, and came to set them free of it.
But they didn’t want that freedom, because God said that their covenant is everlasting, not to be superseded by another, but that they would have a messiah, too restore the kingdom.
Walk in the shoes of a Jew.
All I ever hear from your side, including rhutchin, is sin sin sin, hell hell hell. I don’t see mercy at all.
I feel sorry for the life that God told them to live under. Who can be obedient to 613 commandments? But God commanded them to.
And why?
Romans 5:20, that’s why.
Look at the first part of that verse.
Logically, you would think that the law was given SO THAT sin would DECREASE, right?
Be objective. Be honest in your heart. Read the whole story several times.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote: “Tell that to the atheists. They look at the universe, too.”
AMCM:
Like I said, “our primary spiritual problem is not intellectual (or lack of sufficient evidence), but moral (we want to rebel and be autonomous).” We are selfish, we don’t want to serve anyone else but ourselves! The Atheists don’t want to acknowledge the truth about God, because that would mean that they wouldn’t be able to indulge in the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life. They don’t want a God to tell them what they can and can’t do. They love the darkness and hate the light, because their deeds are evil and they don’t want that exposed.
“The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds;
There is no one who does good.
“The LORD has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men
To see if there are any who understand,
Who seek after God.
They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good, not even one.” (Psalms 14:1-3)
“He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. “For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.” (John 3:18-20)
Then Jesus cried out and said, “He who believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me.
“And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me.
“I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness.
“And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world.
“He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.” ( John 12:44-48)
As the scriptures say, the problem is not intellectual but moral – and in the last day those who rejected Him and His word will be judged by that word!
Aidan,
This has nothing to do with morality or sin or anything of the sort. That’s the major malfunction here, is all you guys want to talk about is REBELLION this, and REBELLION that, sin this and sin that, hell this and hell that. This has nothing to do with any of it.
The WORD of God must be HEARD, hence, the word WORD. That word to us is in WRITTEN FORM, unlike Abraham who actually heard an audible voice, as did Moses. God blinded the Jews for them to NOT understand, NOT DUE TO ANY SIN OR REBELLION. They sin because God told them to obey a law, knowing full and well that NO ONE CAN, and no one ever will…except Jesus. They sin because they are blind. They are not blind because they sin.
Gentiles never had any of what God told them to do. It’s mind boggling and baffling that all your side wants to discuss is REBELLION.
You would be too, had you been a Jew. Wouldn’t you want to be made free from being obedient to 613 commandments and only be obedient to two? Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself is NOT BURDENSOME, but God gave them 613 of them…and why?
I told you why, but you talk about REBELLION?
I gave you Romans 5:20, and you talk about REBELLION? Come on, man. Seriously?
Ed Chapman
ED, wrote:
“God blinded the Jews for them to NOT understand, NOT DUE TO ANY SIN OR REBELLION.”
AMCM:
No, the Jews had a history of blinding themselves and hardening their own hearts!
‘Go to this people and say:
“Hearing you will hear, and shall not understand;
And seeing you will see, and not perceive;
For the hearts of this people have grown dull.
Their ears are hard of hearing,
And their eyes they have closed,
Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.”
“Therefore let it be known to you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will hear it!” And when he had said these words, the Jews departed and had a great dispute among themselves.” (Acts 28:26-29)
“You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.
“Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, “who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it.” (Acts 7: 51-53)
Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says:
“Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion,
In the day of trial in the wilderness,
Where your fathers tested Me, tried Me,
And saw My works forty years. (Heb. 3:7-9)
“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! (Mat. 23:37)
What was the problem? “but you were not willing!”
Aidan,
OK, buddy, get ready for some SCHOOLING, cuz you are OFF THE MARK, quoting verses that you have no idea the ORIGIN of it.
I will LEARN YA.
But…I gotta EAT dinner first. “FRESH FROM THE FREEZER!” Be back in about an hour or less.
Ed
I will be a snoozin when you are penning your your letters, because it’s after 2 am here.
I’ll catch up tomorrow! And, I have only ONE teacher and schoolmaster.
Aidan,
OK, no problem, MY CHILD….lol.
Ed
Aidan,
Ya know, I’ve noticed that I provide VERSES A LOT, cuz I love to back up what I say…but I don’t find many people, no, ZERO people, ACTUALLY study what I provide. Probably because I don’t have the Dr. before my name, I don’t know. Back in the Apostolic days, Luke was the only Dr. that I heard of.
Have ya ever heard the term, “They were “DESTINED” TO FAIL!” Well, THAT’S THE STORY FOR THE JEWS.
But you people really think that the Jews were EXPECTED to obey 613 commandments? Do you really think that God gave them 613 commandments to EARN THEIR WAY TO HEAVEN?
This is the 3rd time, WITHOUT A RESPONSE, that I’m gonna reference Romans 5:20 (FIRST HALF), and HOPE that someone actually reads it.
God set forth 613 commandments for the Jews to EARN THEIR WAY TO HEAVEN, is THAT what you are saying? Is that what EVERYONE is saying? Cuz ya’ll WRONG if you really believe that. Even you SIMON, if you are still listening. God expected them to be disobedieng, rebellious, etc. WHY? That’s the question that YOU ALL need to find out, because there is a reason why, but ya’ll can’t see it.
But first, I’m gonna give a VERY SHORT, easy to understand lesson on the book of Romans, because the way you all (not just you) present things, God is a MEAN OLD MAN, JUST ITCHIN TO SEND EVERYONE TO HELL, but by his “GRACE” AND “MERCY”, only ONE DENOMINATION out of thousands makes it to heaven. You guys all crack me up! Dudes in the Amazon…sucks being them, for they worship PAGAN gods. They don’t know Jesus, never heard of the guy, but DOOMED for eternity, them WICKED people…You guys really crack me up. I’ll never forget the flack that Billy Graham got when he indicated that you will see MUSLIMS, and Buddahists, etc., in heaven. Well, I’M WITH BILLY GRAHAM ON THIS ONE, but I had to study it and figure it out on my own. But, Billy gets many Christians MAD, and why? Cuz he’s not THEIR flavor of Christian. For many years, you hear Christians JUDGING their neighbors, HARSHLY, I might add, as if THEY themselves were Jesus in the flesh, telling people that if you are not a Christian, then you are going to hell. Well ya know what? That’s not exactly a true statement. #1 below ANSWERS IT.
There are THREE groups of people being discussed in Romans
1. THOSE WHO HAVEN’T “HEARD”
2. Those who have “HEARD” AND REJECT
3. Those who have “HEARD” and BELIEVE
Now…come judgement day, WHAT determines their punishment?
1.
Judged by their CONSCIENCE. What does that mean exactly? Say a person stole something. Their conscience convicts them. Guilty. BUT, and this is the kicker…maybe, just maybe that person RETURNED the item stolen, or got caught, and punished IN THE FLESH, confessed. Or is it gonna be a HIDDEN SECRET…That’s in Romans 2:14-16, in that Jesus judges their SECRET thoughts.
Pay very close attention to the last 2 WORDS:
Romans 2:14-16 New International Reader’s Version (NIRV)
14 Gentiles do not have the law. Sometimes they just naturally do what the law requires. They are a law for themselves. This is true even though they don’t have the law. 15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts. The way their minds judge them proves this fact. Sometimes their thoughts find them guilty. At other times their thoughts find them not guilty. 16 This will happen on the day God appoints Jesus Christ to judge people’s secret thoughts. That’s part of my good news.
—————————————-
2.
Those in THIS category should be SELF EXPLANITORY, but, I’ve found that NOT MANY really understand this part. They will be judged by the LAW OF MOSES.
But, for the BLIND JEWS, guess what?
Romans 11:25-32
25 Brothers and sisters, here is a mystery I want you to understand. It will keep you from being proud. Part of Israel has refused to obey God. That will continue until the full number of Gentiles has entered God’s kingdom. 26 In this way all Israel will be saved. It is written,
“The God who saves will come from Mount Zion.
He will remove sin from Jacob’s family.
27
Here is my covenant with them.
I will take away their sins.” (Isaiah 59:20,21; 27:9; Jeremiah 31:33,34)
28 As far as the good news is concerned, the people of Israel are enemies. This is for your good. But as far as God’s choice is concerned, the people of Israel are loved. This is because of God’s promises to the founders of our nation. 29 God does not take back his gifts. He does not change his mind about those he has chosen. 30 At one time you did not obey God. But now you have received mercy because Israel did not obey. 31 In the same way, Israel has not been obeying God. But now they receive mercy because of God’s mercy to you. 32 God has found everyone guilty of not obeying him. So now he can have mercy on everyone.
Are all the Jews blind? NO.
There are TWO different groups in THAT category.
1. What the bible calls, “REMNANT”, which falls under #3 above
2. Those who CLAIM that they can see, as Jesus told the Pharisees, which falls under #2 above.
John 9:40-41 King James Version (KJV)
40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
READ THAT AGAIN…BLIND JEWS, NO SIN, JEWS CLAIMING TO SEE, SINS REMAIN. Does that go over people’s heads? SCRATCH YOUR HEAD and think about that. Ponder it.
—————————————————–
3.
Jesus was already judged for ALL of the sins that could ever be committed, past, present, and FUTURE. Jesus was crucified ONCE FOR ALL SINS, so there is NO NEED to crucify (sacrifice) Jesus again (more than once). Your FUTURE SINS…already judged on Jesus back.
THIS is what gets me so frustrated for those who think that you can lose your salvation. Jesus was judged for FUTURE SINS, too.
Listen, if it were POSSIBLE, the Jews would be sinless, but NO ONE can be sinless. Are you trying on your own MERIT to be sinless as a Christian? If that were possible, ALL JEWS would be sinless. You can’t stop sinning, but the beauty of it is that Jesus already paid the price for your FUTURE sins as well. Do people not get that? Lose your salvation, HA! Can ANYONE stop sinning? NO. They can’t. If they could, they would, but they can’t.
1 Corinthians 15:56, the strength of sin, IS THE LAW.
We are not under the law, so sin has NO POWER, no matter what sin we commit, and why? Because Jesus was ALREADY judged for it, and THAT is the SOLE reason that 1 John 3:9 states what it states…we are DEAD, IN CHRIST.
Moving on————————————–
Have you ever heard that the OT “conceals”, the NT “reveals”. Well, THAT’S HOW YA LEARN THINGS OF GOD, so that you can TAKE THAT BACK TO THE OT, and RE-READ IT in a NEW LIGHT, called, SPIRITUAL understanding, instead of CARNAL understanding.
Example:
How you do know that Jesus is the promised seed, IF…IF…YOU ONLY READ THE OT?
The answer: You don’t know, NO ONE will ever know. But it is revealed in Galatians 3.
And, when Isaiah states that the VIRGIN shall have a child…what is the name of that child? EMANUEL. NOT JESUS. So, you got the Jews probably looking for someone named EMANUEL. Yes, we know the MEANING of the word, “GOD WITH US”, but what’s the meaning of the word “EZEKIEL”, or “Isaiah”? Those two were MEN ONLY, not God.
So, I’m gonna take ya on a little journey…
Hang on tight!
————————————————
Look at the word, “HID” in the below to references of the SAME BOOK OF THE GOSPEL OF LUKE…TWICE.
Luke 9:44-45 King James Version (KJV)
44 Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men.
45 But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying.
——————-
Luke 18:31-34 King James Version (KJV)
31 Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on:
33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
34 And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.
So, here we have Jesus, telling these FOLLOWERS OF HIS, to UNDERSTAND, but they COULDN’T understand, not that they didn’t want to, but because it was HID from them to understand.
Do you understand? Jesus telling them to understand, but Jesus hid from them the understanding…and you wonder why Jesus said:
“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! (Mat. 23:37)
They weren’t willing, because THAT’S WHAT GOD WANTED OF THEM in the first place. Don’t use LOGIC because LOGIC will never work here. The Jews were DESTINED to fail.
———————————————–
Now, look at Romans 11:8 from the NIVr VERSION
8 It is written,
“God made it hard for them to understand.
He gave them eyes that could not see.
He gave them ears that could not hear.
And they are still like that today.” (Deuteronomy 29:4; Isaiah 29:10)
————————-
Whooh…”IT IS WRITTEN”? Hmmmmm…it is WRITTEN. And it gives a REFERENCE…
Let’s see that reference:
Deuteronomy 29:4 New International Reader’s Version (NIRV)
4 But to this day the Lord hasn’t given you a mind that understands. He hasn’t given you eyes that see. He hasn’t given you ears that hear.
Moses, speaking to the CHILDREN OF ISRAEL (obviously, Moses did have eyes to see, ears to hear, and a mind to understand, but look at what he’s telling them…the words, “TO THIS DAY” means…NEVER. God has NEVER givent them a mind to understand, eyes to see, ears to hear.
Do you know WHY it is said that NO ONE UNDERSTANDS, NO ONE SEEKS GOD. It’s discussing the Jews only, by the way, when it states that, but do you know WHY it is said that?
Becasue they are TOO BUSY WALKING ON EGG SHELLS ATTEMPTING TO OBEY THE 613 COMMANDMENTS, there is NO TIME IN THE DAY TO DO ANYTHING BUT SLEEP, let alone, SEEK GOD. That’s why…
But all you people see, without understanding it yourselves is…REBELLION, DISOBEDIENT, SIN SIN SIN, HELL HELL HELL.
Your god is a mean old man, not one of mercy at all…well, except for YOUR DENOMINATION ONLY, of course.
Class dismissed.
Ed Chapman
Hello Ed,
Now I see! You are a CALVINIST at heart. If RH is a conservative, you are the opposite – a liberal Calvinist. What’s the difference? He believes that most people are determined by God as wicked and depraved and lost. You believe that most people are determined by God to be wicked, but yet innocent and saved after they die. And the Jews? Well, you have God determining their unfaithfulness. He was the one who blinded them and hardened their hearts to do all sorts of gross evil wicked things. And, caused them to reject and murder Jesus Christ! But here’s the kicker, you believe they are not lost, because Israel is gonna be saved in the end. Kinda like, whether they like it or not! But here’s the other thing; your doctrine makes God responsible for most of the wickedness and evil that has ever been committed in the world.
So in a nutshell: God determined who He would reveal Himself to and who He would not! Determining that most of the Gentile world would be ignorant, yet, – shall be exonerated, absolved and pretty much gonna be saved! And that most of the Jews would be blind, yet, – shall be exonerated, absolved and pretty much gonna be saved! So that in the end – God determined it all.
That’s pure Calvinism at heart!
Nope, I am not a Calvinist.
obviously, you don’t study what I provided.
So be it.
The Calvinists take all that is meant for the Jews only, and wrap it up for Calvinists only, calling themselves the elect, when i, and a few others have been pointing out that, NO, ONLY THE JEWS ARE THE ELECT.
Huge difference.
But, the way I explained it, many churches here in America believe that… except, of course, Catholics and reformers.
Sad.
Well, don’t study, and lose your salvation then.
In done here.
Ed Chapman
Yeah! But what you are teaching is very Calvinistic.
No, it isn’t Calvinist at all. You haven’t studied. I have.
Ed Chapman
Yes it is! You have God determining sin and showing favoritism. And yes I have studied, and you have studied, but you are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
“that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (1 Pet. 3: 20-21)
I’m sorry but you can’t get rid of this from your bible, as much as you’d love to.
That’s CARNAL stuff. Not spiritual. Noah never went swimming. He was dry, I the ark.
“By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.” (Heb. 11:7)
Noah and his household were the only ones saved out of that very wicked world. He was the only one who became the heir of the righteousness which is according to faith, out of that wicked world. That world did not.
Aidan,
Hey, just one piece of advice.
Don’t forget to get wet every time you get RE-SAVED, cuz if ya don’t, then you are not SAVED AGAIN at all, destined to hell.
That’s my charming sarcasm, of course.
Ed Chapman
You don’t seem to realise that the context of (1 John 3:9) is talking about the PRACTICE OF SIN.
Big difference between that and (1 Jn 1: 8-10) where the Christian is repenting and confessing whenever he sins.
NOTICE? No mention of baptism for the one already IN CHRIST.
No… it isn’t. You have no idea what the phrase means, DEAD, COUPLED WITH THE WORDS, IN CHRIST means.
In Christ simply means CHRISTIAN.
DEAD people can’t sin.
You are inserting words where they are not, regarding 1 John 3:9, just like Jehovah witnesses do regarding John 10:30, where they insert the words “in agreement” after the word, “one”.
Nice try tho.
Ed Chapman
Obviously you don’t understand the context of 1 Jn 3.
Nor do you understand that John is talking to Christians who are IN CHRIST in 1 John 1:8-10.
So, Nice try yerself!
Yes, I do know. Verse 4… sin is the transgression of the law. Romans 4:15, where no law is, there is no transgression. Romans 5:13, before the law, sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed where there is no law. We are not under the law, therefore, sin is not imputed. We are DEAD, and dead people can’t sin 1 John3:9
I do know the context of 1 John 3… very well.
Ed Chapman
(1 Jn 3:4) – “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” We are under law, namely, the law of Christ – therefore Christians can practice sin by violating the law of Christ.
( 2 Thess. 1:7-9) “when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.” Seems I’m not the one warning about fire and eternal destruction on those who do not know God or obey the gospel!
And if we are dead so that we can’t do evil, then neither can dead people do good, or do anything at all – for they are DEAD!
Aidan,
You had said:
“(1 Jn 3:4) – “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” We are under law, namely, the law of Christ – therefore Christians can practice sin by violating the law of Christ.
( 2 Thess. 1:7-9) “when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.” Seems I’m not the one warning about fire and eternal destruction on those who do not know God or obey the gospel!
And if we are dead so that we can’t do evil, then neither can dead people do good, or do anything at all – for they are DEAD!”
My response:
THOSE PEOPLE IN 1 JOHN 3:4 ARE THOSE UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES, NOT THE LAW OF CHRIST. So, your counter argument is UNRELATED to Christians. Verse 9 is for CHRISTIANS.
NEXT
2 Thess 1:7-9 is NOT DISCUSSING CHRISTIANS, AT ALL, BECAUSE CHRISTIANS OBEY THE GOSPEL, THEREFORE, THESE PEOPLE WERE NEVER CHRISTIANS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
How do we know this? Because of WHEAT AND CHAFF, people IN CHURCH claiming to be Christians, but they are PHONY, NOT CHRISTIANS, BUT PROCLAIMING TO BE.
This is also noted in Matthew 7, I believe, where THESE PEOPLE proclaiming to be Christian, but are not, Jesus states, “I NEVER KNEW YOU”. Those people claiming to be Christians, were NOT PRODUCTING FRUIT, and you know them by their fruit, and the unfruitful are NOT BRETHREN, AND NOT CHRISTIANS, but they proclaim to be.
Dude, you have a LOT of learning to do before you go spouting off counter argument scriptures.
Christians, BY DEFAULT, produce fruit, and obey the gospel of Christ. So you are misusing 2 Thess 1:7-9, as if to PROVE that what you think is LOSING YOUR SALVATION. No, those people were NOT SAVED TO BEGIN WITH. But you think that they were SAVED AT ONE TIME, BUT LOST IT.
How convenient to DELETE the verses that I provide, in order to make your doctrine stick. Good on ya, mate! Spread that false doctrine!
Ed Chapman
Aidan states:
“And if we are dead so that we can’t do evil, then neither can dead people do good, or do anything at all – for they are DEAD!””
My response:
You mock what you don’t know…
Romans 6:7
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Romans 6:11
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin
Romans 7:4
Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law
Romans 7:8
For without the law sin was dead.
Galatians 2:19
For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
Colossians 3:3
For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.
THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PHARSES DEAD “IN” SIN, VS. DEAD “TO” SIN.
Learn the difference. You MOCK WHAT YOU DON’T KNOW. A sign of ignorance.
Ed Chapman
Regarding 1 John 1:8-10,
I never ever said that you can’t sin. I said dead people can’t sin.
If you are dead, you can’t sin, all because the law does not exist for you.
But yes, you sin all the time. But no sin is gonna get imputed to you, because Jesus was already judged for it.
If you actually read what I wrote to you last night, no one can stop sinning, ever.
When you are in Christ, God deals with you as a child of God, scolding you for your sins. Not for the purpose of kicking you out of the family to hell.
Come on man. Get this, would ya, please!
Ed Chapman
Ed Chapman
No, God doesn’t want to kick anybody out. He wants all to be saved. But He wants Christians to walk in the light and not walk in the darkness so that they may continue to have fellowship with Him. Emphasis is on how we walk! Continuing fellowship and forgiveness of sins is conditional upon how one walks.
(1 Jn. 1:6-7) “If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”
Aidan,
Look, I am DONE, OK. You THINK you know scripture.
You haven’t read or studied a dog gone thing that I provided. You come up with COUNTER arguments that ISN’T BASED ON ANYTHING substantive or related. It’s as if what you choose to counter my VERSES (not opinion, but VERSES), are OFF THE WALL, at random stuff that I’m like, WHAT THE HECK IS THIS GUY TALKING ABOUT?
So, as the bible states:
1 Corinthians 14:38
But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
When you are ready to sit at the BIG BOY table, let me know!
Ed Chapman
I’m dealing with what the passage ACTUALLY teaches, you’re not. You are ignoring what John is telling these Christians here. That’s your problem every time.
(1 Jn. 1:6-7) “If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”
(1 Jn 1:8-10) “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.”
(1 Jn. 2:1) “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;”
You say it’s all unconditional: These verses all say the opposite, namely, that its all conditional. You are blinding yourself to what these verses teach.
What does “if we” mean throughout these verses?
Aidan,
Again, you DELETE all the verses that I provide in order for your doctrine to make sense to you. Your 1 John is in reference to FAKE CHRISTIANS, not CHRISTIANS.
If we say that we…and walk in darkenss…You call that a Christian who LOST their salvation, but I call that, BASED ON WHAT I ALREADY PROVIDED THAT YOU DELETE, NOT CHRISTIANS IN THE FIRST PLACE.
So, go ahead, DELETE what you don’t like, keep what you do, and be done with it, spread your false doctrine that you can lose your salvation, when I KNOW THAT YOU CAN’T LOSE YOUR SALVATION AT ALL.
You refuse to study what I PROVIDED. You don’t, and won’t. SO I’M DONE. You are NOT TEACHABLE.
You have a different way of interpreting scritpure, all because YOU DON’T WANT certain verses to say what it states, so you MAKE UP A STORY to make it say something else that it doesn’t even say.
So just pretend that we never spoke at all. I’m done.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
“Your 1 John is in reference to FAKE CHRISTIANS, not CHRISTIANS.”
AMCM:
(1 John 1:6-10) If it’s not possible, then why the warnings?
If WE say that WE have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, WE LIE
But if WE walk in the light……His Son CLEANSES US from all sin.
If WE SAY that WE have no sin, WE deceive OURSELVES, and the truth is not IN US.
If WE confess OUR SINS, He is faithful and just to forgive US OUR SINS and to CLEANSE US from all unrighteousness.
If WE say that WE have not sinned, WE MAKE Him a liar, and His word is not in US.
If these are fake Christians, then John included himself as one.
ED wrote:
“You refuse to study what I PROVIDED. You have a different way of interpreting scritpure.”
AMCM:
I did study the verses you provided. I just like to interpret passages from their context and you just don’t seem to be applying them that way. For example, Romans 5 seems to be dealing with physical death in the context. Therefore, in light of that context you haven’t given a satisfactory answer for v.13, simply because you refuse to deal with the context.
Aidan,
I’m DONE.
You preach your understanding of doctrine to someone else, cuz I don’t buy into it, nor do I buy into water baptism, either. This is why we have DENOMINATIONS.
But, like I said, YOUR DENOMINATION is the ONLY ONE SAVED…ALL THE REST OF US CHRISTIANS ARE GOING TO HELL, all because we don’t buy into what you are selling.
Ed Chapman
Ed,
I replaced the comment in this post accusing someone of preaching false doctrine.
I didn’t know that wasn’t allowed.
We may see a Calvinists popping up here for the first time and making accusations like that against Dr. Flowers etc.
An emotional angry or antagonistic attack on a person can happen
And we’ve even had one Calvinist participant here who lowered himself to those types of statements against participants on a consistent basis.
When they are a one-off like a Calvinist popping up for the first time – who is here just to shoot off an attack – we kind of live with it.
But as consistent participants we want modulate those kinds of statements so they do not appear as personal attacks.
If you see me falling below that threshold – please let me know as well.
brdmod,
Copy that!!
Aidan,
Nor do I buy into the cessation of spiritual gifts, nor do I buy into that the END TIMES began in Acts 2, nor do I buy into your interpretation of “THESE” COUPLED WITH THE WORDS “LAST DAYS”, as meaning THE LAST DAYS.
I could go on and on and on regarding my disagreements with you…I don’t read what you read, and guess what? Not many others do either, but I’m sure your denomination does…and you guys will be the only ones in heaven.
Condemning EVERYONE ELSE in the world, NO MERCY, TAKE NO PRISONERS, just wrath wrath wrath…
So I say that the Jews are Elect, Calvinists say that they are elect…WHAT SAY YOU?
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
Nor do I buy into the cessation of spiritual gifts,
AMCM:
What miracles have you seen that match the biblical record? Tell me!
ED wrote:
“I don’t read what you read, and guess what? Not many others do either.”
AMCM:
And why should that matter? (GAL. 1:10)
ED wrote:
“Condemning EVERYONE ELSE in the world, NO MERCY, TAKE NO PRISONERS, just wrath wrath wrath…”
AMCM:
Again, that’s just your interpretation. You might think that people of all different religions are going to heaven, including wicked people; but that’s not what the scriptures teach. I’m sorry if that bothers you, but them be the facts. I wouldn’t take any comfort in what Billy Graham has said if I were you!
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6)
“Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12)
ED wrote:
“So I say that the Jews are Elect, Calvinists say that they are elect…WHAT SAY YOU?”
AMCM:
You have the scriptures, follow what they say!
Public record? Is that like the Catholics send out INVESTIGATORS to seek out fake miracles of former dead popes to declare them Saint?
Public record?
Well, ya know what? Yes, my best friend has had miracles done with HIS OWN FAMILY. But you go ahead and be a skeptic. And there are witnesses. But PUBLIC RECORD? Why is PUBLIC RECORD an important aspect to you? If it were, they would be MOCKED, just like you are mocking it.
People do tell their stories, but PEOPLE MOCK THEM. Take for example, Nikki Sixx of Motley Crew, DIED of an overdose of drugs, he FLOATED up above his body, saw his body below…he didn’t leave the earth to heaven or hell, but he did die and did see his body, but he didn’t say anything for a very long time about it, because he KNEW that he would get MOCKED for it, and guess what? He did get mocked for it, and mostly by CHRISTIANS like yourself that don’t believe in that kind of thing.
People have been reporting this stuff for years, only to get mocked, and you wonder why people stay silent? People like you!
Like I said, I’ve already studied the bible, I laid out Romans for you in a very easy to understand way, and you thing that those who died BEFORE Jesus came on the scene is BURNING IN HELL, well, I don’t buy into your logic one bit.
I’ve heard your story from others in your like belief system, and quite frankly, I’m appauled at that teaching.
Ed
I didn’t say “public record,” I said “What miracles have you seen that match the biblical record?” And seemingly, you haven’t been able to personally provide anything except, anecdotal stories! I’m afraid anecdotal stories and hearsay, with little or no detail, do little to prove or match the biblical record.
You hear anecdotal stories of so called miracles all the time, in all sorts of religions, even in Catholicism. Somehow the Holy Spirit is with them all, working miracles, yet teaching polar opposite doctrines? Don’t be so naive! The bible teaches that they have passed away (1 Cor. 13: 8-10).
And, I’m sorry, but I don’t buy your view that the wicked world of Noah’s day will be in heaven with the righteous. I think your view of that passage in Peter is mistaken. There are a number of different interpretations of that passage. Your’s has too many contradictions with other scriptures.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Like I said, you mock it, because you want first hand knowledge.
Yet, we have 2nd hand record of the miracles of Jesus, and you believe those .
Whatever, dude.
If you believe that God died for the ungodly, then you would believe that he died for the ungodly. But you make exceptions to the word ungodly.
But then again, Romans 5:13, Romans 4:15.
Delete verses you don’t like.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote: Yet, we have 2nd hand record of the miracles of Jesus, and you believe those .
AMCM:
Absolutely! God bore witness to them. (Heb. 2:4) “while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.”
It was not anecdotal evidence, but done out in the open, on the streets in public among the people! ( Acts 5: 12, 14-16) “And through the hands of the apostles many signs and wonders were done among the people. And they were all with one accord in Solomon’s Porch. And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women, so that they brought the sick out into the streets and laid them on beds and couches, that at least the shadow of Peter passing by might fall on some of them. Also a multitude gathered from the surrounding cities to Jerusalem, bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits, and they were all healed.”
Seen anything like that since then? I don’t think so!
ED wrote: If you believe that God died for the ungodly, then you would believe that he died for the ungodly.
AMCM: Christ did indeed die for the ungodly, whom you seem to think are not perishing? If so, Jesus made a big mistake dying for them.
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
(2 Pt. 2:5) They didn’t see fit to repent at Noah’s preaching, a preacher of righteousness:
“and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;”
Jesus said the he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, specifically mentioning Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So, even tho they perished, they are not dead. Those in the flood, they perished, I the flesh, but were not dead. Otherwise, Jesus would not have preached to them, according to the epistle of Peter.
Acts 17:30… Romans 5:13…
What could they repent of?
There was no law informing them of what to repent from.
How can any one believe in something without first being TOLD about that something?
You can’t. So by virtue of the timing of your birth, that Jesus was in our past, you think you have the secret code that you are more blessed than they are now? You got some funky thinking, regarding the word perish.
Perishing in this carnal world in a flood has nothing to do with the afterlife. But you’ve taken that Peter epistle about an event that happened in this carnal life, thinking it was FINAL JUDGMENT for them.
Many atheists can’t stand the thought of a loving God committing genocide, mentioning the flood.
But if it is THIS LIFE ONLY that you see, then you can’t see.
Jesus preached to these perished, in the flesh, people.
Jesus died for their sins, too.
I can’t understand why you think otherwise.
How is their wickedness in the flood, any different from YOUR wickedness before you became a Christian?
God does NOT show favouritism. But the way you explain it, he favored you over them.
Acts 17:30 Romans 5:13.
Oh, that’s right… Those verses aren’t in your bible. And if they are, you have a different explanation than most people do.
Ed Chapman
And let’s not forget all those wicked children that perished in the flood, too, since you seem to have mercy on children, yet they PERISHED, too! Right?
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
God WINKED AT, OVERLOOKED, BUT NOW…
But according to you, God didn’t really overlook anything, they are all burning in hell, RIGHT?
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
You had said:
(1 Jn. 2:1) “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;”
My response:
It is indeed WITHOUT CONDITION…here is the reason why:
“Hebrews 12:8
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
We will NEVER LOSE OUR SALVATION, BECAUSE IT IS GOD WHO DISCIPLINES HIS CHILDREN. He does NOT, kick us out of the HOUSE as YOU preach…he chastises us as HIS CHILDREN, his family.
God will NEVER LEAVE US NOR FORSAKE US.
But, for some GOD AWEFUL REASON, you think that you can lose your salvation. THAT’S NOT POSSIBLE. Ever.
Ed Chapman
ED, wrote:
God will NEVER LEAVE US NOR FORSAKE US.
AMCM:
You are right, except, WE ARE THE ONES WHO FORSAKE HIM.
Aidan states:
“ED, wrote:
God will NEVER LEAVE US NOR FORSAKE US.
AMCM:
You are right, except, WE ARE THE ONES WHO FORSAKE HIM.”
My resposne:
THINK about THAT response of yours JUST FOR A MOMENT.
IF God will never leave us nor forsake us, HOW CAN WE LEAVE HIM? NO MATTER WHERE WE GO, THERE HE, because he never left us.
It’s like a sister that all you want her to do is to GET LOST, but everywhere you go, THERE SHE IS bugging you. You leave her, but no matter where you go, THERE SHE IS.
So, I never could understand HOW people can say that God will never leave you, but you can leave him. HOW?
If you can leave him, HE WAS NEVER IN YA TO BEGIN WITH!
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
You had said:
” But He wants Christians to walk in the light and not walk in the darkness so that they may continue to have fellowship with Him. ”
My response:
AND THEN JOHN TELLS US “WHO” walks in darkness, vs. WHO doesn’t. READ THE WHOLE STORY.
Those who walk in darkness were NEVER CHRISTIANS TO BEGIN WITH, not the way that you describe it, in that they once walked in the light, and THEN LATER began walking in darkness.
The way that you describe things, Jesus didn’t do a very good job at saving people if we must EARN our way by NOT SINNING.
For by the deeds of the law shall no man be justified, but you WANT to OBEY the law, so as to EARN YOUR WAY. You don’t accept the GIFT, you want to EARN IT YOURSELF by WORKING for it.
Well, WORKS SALVATION is not how MOST OF US read the bible. We call those people LEGALISTS. Save yourself!
Ed Chapman
ED writes:
“For by the deeds of the law shall no man be justified”
AMCM:
Ed, I keep telling you, we are not under the Law of Moses. But men are under the law of Christ. He is Lord, and His law must be obeyed should it not? Otherwise, one is found to be disobedient and acting unlawfully.
(Mat. 28:18-20) And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
“teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
Notice: “ALL AUTHORITY” is His. Acts 2:36 says, He is “both Lord and Christ”. And, disciples are TAUGHT “to observe all things that I have commanded you.” Call that legalism if you want, but that’s what the Lord commands. “And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him” (Heb. 5:9)
Aidan,
Your statements contradict themselves. On one hand, you can lose your salvation, and THAT MEANS that you MUST EARN IT BACK BY not sinning, and THAT, in and of itself is DEEDS OF THE LAW. You can’t have it BOTH WAYS.
Sounds to me that YOU have all authority, for YOU are the one judging those who died before Jesus came on the scene, yet you REFUSE to see Romans 5:13, Romans 4:15, and a whole slew of others.
You mock what you don’t know.
You don’t even know WHAT the law of Christ is. There is only ONE COMMANDMENT under the law of Christ. But you think BAPTIZING people is a COMMANDMENT.
1 Corinthians 1:17
For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel:
Works of faith are not the same as deeds of the law!
Quoting 1 Cor. 1:17 out of context is simply creating a Straw man!
No straws, dude. What is sin under the law of Christ?
What is the law of Christ.
you accuse straw man because you know of nothing else to say.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote: What is the law of Christ.
AMCM: Something you should submit to rather than go back to the Law of Moses!
1 Cor 1:17 – If no straws, man – then you agree that Paul is teaching the absolute necessity of baptism there.
Aidan,
You had said:
“D wrote: What is the law of Christ.
AMCM: Something you should submit to rather than go back to the Law of Moses!
1 Cor 1:17 – If no straws, man – then you agree that Paul is teaching the absolute necessity of baptism there.”
My response:
You did not define the Law of Christ. So I will:
Galatians 5:14
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Romans 13:8-10 (KJV)
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet;
and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying,
namely,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
————————————–
First….The Law of Moses (613 Commandments, THE LAW OF BONDAGE) The Law of Sin and Death
Galatians 4:24
for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage
1. RIghteousness of THE LAW
Works
A worker is one who works, right? Well, the Bible states that a worker is one who is a “doer”, a doer of the work, not just a hearer.
Exodus 24:3
And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord hath said will we do.
Notice the last word in that verse, “do”. Later, in Deuteronomy 5, Moses once again reiterates what was spoken in Exodus 20 – 24. After that review, the children of Israel responds:
Deuteronomy 6:25
And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.
Again, notice the word, “do”. That is works of righteousness. Obedience to the law of Moses is known as works of Righteousness. If anyone can keep the law perfectly, then they have “earned” a wage, and God “owes” them eternal life. That is why it is called “works”, or “deeds”.
Romans 4:4
Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned.
Romans 6:23 (WAGES IS SOMETHING EARNED BY WORKING)
the wages of sin is death
Galatians 2:16
a man is not justified by the works of the law…for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 3:10
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
NEXT, THE LAW OF CHRIST:
——————————THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD WITHOUT THE LAW—————————————(Noah, PREACHER OF RIGHTEOUSNESS…WITHOUT THE LAW)
The law of Chist is known as THE LAW OF FAITH, THE LAW OF LIBERTY, THE LAW OF LIFE
James 1:25
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
James 2:12
So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
Galatians 6:2
Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
Romans 3:27
Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
No Works
1 John 3:4
sin is the transgression of the law.
Romans 3:20
the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 5:13
For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 4:15
where no law is, there is no transgression.
Romans 4:8
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
Romans 6:7
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Romans 6:11
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead
Romans 7:4
ye also are become dead to the law
Galatians 2:19
For I through the law am dead to the law,
Romans 7:8
For without the law sin was dead.
Galatians 2:21
if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Romans 3:21
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested
Romans 4:5
faith is counted for righteousness.
Romans 4:13
not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace
Galatians 3:12
the law is not of faith
Galatians 3:21
if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Romans 4:2
For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Romans 4:5-6
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
Romans 11:6
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
Galatians 4:21
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
Romans 5:20 (NIVr)
The law was given so that sin would increase.
Romans 2:14-16
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
By nature, they obey laws that they don’t even have. It’s called a conscience. And Jesus judges them by what they know, not by what they don’t know, and Paul calls that good news (gospel), and these people don’t even know God, or Jesus. So, do people who don’t know God, or Jesus, automatically go to hell because they are sinners? NO. But some seem to think so.
Galatians 4:21
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
*******************************************Bottom line:***************************************************
Faith is KNOWING that we are going to get what we are waiting for. (Hebrews 11:1) Obeying the law of Moses is earning your way, not knowing for sure.
Acts 15:5
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
Acts 15:24
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
The law of Moses is Bondage. Jesus set us free from the law. Flesh vs. Spirit
Galatians 4:24
for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage
Hebrews 11:1 again, BROKEN DOWN TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR:
FAITH IS….KNOWING…KNOWING….KNOWING THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET WHAT WE ARE WAITING FOR.
What does it mean to have faith in Jesus? KNOWING that he is gonna get us what we are waiting for, because THAT is what God promised Abraham, that PROMISED SEED (Jesus), AND PROMISED LAND (heaven).
So live in the FREEDOM that Jesus gives, WITHOUT THE LAW.
NO ONE can STOP SINNING, ever, and therefore, YOU DON’T LOSE YOUR SALVATION just because you sin, SINCE you are not under the law of Moses.
If salvation was dependent on NOT SINNING, then Abraham would be in Hell. For all have sinned. But, if you are IN CHRIST, Romans 4:8. You are NOT UNDER THE LAW, just LIKE Abraham was NOT UNDER THE LAW, therefore, SIN IS NOT IMPUTED TO ANYONE NOT UNDER THE LAW.
But people don’t seem to get that sin is NOT IMPUTED TO THOSE NOT UNDER THE LAW. They PREACH ALL DAY LONG that we are not under the law, but they also PREACH ALL DAY that sin is imputed to everyone NOT UNDER THE LAW, as well.
How is that even possible if you are not under the law? Dead people can’t sin.
You had previousely said that dead people can’t do GOOD, as well. Not exactly true. We are talking those “IN CHRIST”, AKA DEAD “IN CHRIST”.
Those in heaven are “DEAD AND BURIED”, (Book of Acts states that David is DEAD AND BURIED), and you are telling me that David is NOT DOING GOOD? In heaven, there is NO DEVIL, no temptation, no evil, and therefore, EVERYONE IS HEAVEN IS DOING GOOD, and no one CAN do evil. No one CAN sin. (Hence 1 John 3:9). If you are BORN OF GOD, you CAN’T sin. It’s as if you are ALREADY in Heavenly places with Jesus RIGHT NOW.
***************People in the Noah Flood time are WITH JESUS NOW! He died THE UNJUST*******************
1 Peter 3:18-20
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
NOTE:
THOSE 3 VERSES ARE PROBABLY NOT IN YOUR BIBLE, SO I WILL CAST A SPELL TO INSERT THEM FOR YOU!! With the time change, I’m not sure how long it takes for a spell to take place half way across the world!! LOL. But check 1 Peter chapter 3 periodically to see if the spell succeeded or not.
Ed Chapman
The law of Christ is the teaching of the whole of the New Testament.
(Isaiah 2:3) Many people shall come and say,
“Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD,
To the house of the God of Jacob;
He will teach us His ways,
And we shall walk in His paths.”
For out of Zion shall go forth the law,
And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
(Mt. 28:18-20) And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
(James 1:21-25) “Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls. But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; for he observes himself, goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. – But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.”
The law of Christ has works!
(James 1:25) “But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.”
(James 2:14, 20-21)”What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?”
(1 Jn 3:4) NASB – “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” Excellent translation of this verse by the way.
(Rom. 3:23) “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”
Sin is lawlessness, all have sinned, therefore there has always been – law. And, one sins when he transgresses the law of Christ! The wages of sin is death.
You keep misquoting 1 John 3:4 to say something that it does not say.
James use of the word works has nothing to do with Romans 4 use of the word works.
James use is that you live what you believe, and it gives the example of Abraham sacrificing his son. Why was he going to comply? Because he believed the promise that his seed would continue thru the son that he was gonna kill, so in order for that to happen, Abraham would kill his son, and God would resurrect him from the dead, so that God’s promise would come true. He believed (faith) God’s promise, so he had no problem killing (WORKS) his son. That’s works in the James context.
Ed Chapman
No there was no law in Abraham’s day.
It was just a free for all, right?
It can’t be a FREE FOR ALL unless you KNOW the law, and do the opposite. You have to FIRST KNOW what you are doing wrong…Romans 5:13 SPECIFICALLY states that BEFORE THE LAW….BEFORE THE LAW…BEFORE…SIN WAS IN THE WORLD, BUT…SIN IS NOT IMPUTED WHERE THERE IS NOT LAW…ROMANS 4:8, BLESSED IS THE MAN THAT SIN IS NOT IMPUTED. Romans 4:15 because the LAW works WRATH, for where no law is, there is NO TRANSGRESSION. These are verses that YOU just can’t seem to GRASP, and you REFUSE TO, don’t want to, you wish that they never existed. Romans 2:14-16….oh and lets not forget Abraham sleeping with his sister…out of all the women that he could marry, he chose his SISTER. He was a few generations down from Noah, so no need to poplulate the world with his SISTER. That’s a sin. But GOD OVERLOOKED that sin, but ROMANS 5:13, SIN WAS IN THE WORLD, for all have sinned. yes, even Abraham…no law, no repenting, overlooked, and God gave brother/sister and inbred.
And yet, Abraham’s sins had to be forgiven!
“BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN,
AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED.
Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, “FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.” (Rom. 4:7,9).
In Romans, Paul is comparing a law or system of works AGAINST a law or system of faith (Rom 3:27).
NO, There is no such thing as LAWLESS deeds when there is NO LAW.
Hence, there WAS law!
The law began in Exodus 20.
The Law of Moses for Israel – well said.
You do know why I said that, right? Because Abraham was 4 generations before that, therefore, the law was NOT FOR ABRAHAM, AND we are SONS OF ABRAHAM, not sons of Jacob (Israel). So, we are not sinning (regarding salvation). You can only be IMPUTED sin under the law. Romans 4:8, 15, 5:13.
Sure, the law was not for Abraham, nor is it for us – agreed!
Yet Abraham sinned and needed forgiveness Rom 4:7-9.
The wages of sin is death!
How many times do I have to say that Abraham didn’t WORK (Romans 4). WORKS only pertains to the Law of Moses, therefore, he didn’t EARN death. There is NO NEED to forgive something that did not exist for him. ROMANS 4:8. The ONLY WAY that sin needs forgiven is if sin is first IMPUTED to you.
Your Romans 4:7 changes the subject to those under the law already, for David was under the law. David was not discussing Abraham in your reference.
And how many times do I have to say that Romans is only dealing with WORKS OF LAW, whereas, James is dealing with WORKS OF FAITH. You’ve got Romans all wrong!
You can’t disconnect Rom 4:6-8, with Romans 4:9; This BLESSING ALL INCLUDED was for the Uncircumcised as well (v.9). Proof positive that you are greatly mistaken in the things that you say.
Your response here proves my point that Paul is discussing those under the law, the Jews, for those under the law are under a CURSE, not a blessing.
Ed Chapman
I gotta get ready for going to work. I can’t talk for sevaral hours. I got scolded by the foreman last week for being on my phone, twice…he said that there will not be a third warning! lol. So, talk to ya later!
No Problem! I don’t want you to get into trouble from the law of the foreman. Lol…
1 Cor 15:56, Romans 5:20
Rom. 3:23; 6:23; John 3:16; Heb. 9:27
Romans 3:20, 7:7-9, 5:13, 4:15,8
Rom. 3:23; 6:23; John 3:16; Heb. 9:27
And don’t forget Rom. 4:7-9
Again, Romans 7:7-9. Romans 4 is about Abraham BEFORE the law. Romans 3:23 has to be in conjuction with KNOWLEDGE of the law in order to be IMPUTED. Hence THE NAME OF THE TREE IN THE GARDEN. No knowledge, IGNORANCE IS BLISS. Paul states that he was ALIVE before he knew the law (Romans 3:20, for by the law is the KNOWLEDGE of sin). Once he knew, he spiritually died, and why? Because he finally knew his sins. At what age did he FINALLY know his sins? Before the law, SIN WAS DEAD he states. So even tho he sinned (1 Cor 15:56), sin had NO POWER, for sin was DEAD.
I really wish you would TAKE THE TIME to study this stuff out. Until then, you are only going to regurgitate the same ole stuff that means nothing to me, becasue I’ve already been there, done that. Your god is a mean old man, just itching to send people to hell, and YOU have NO MERCY to anyone. But my God has mercy to those who are IGNORANT of their sins, for he does NOT impute sins to the ignorant. And, once they find out, then they repent, and THEN they die to Sin, and sin has NO POWER over them, regardlesss of the sins they commit. The latter part of Romans 7 tells us that Paul still sins, that he does what he does NOT want to do. Do you really think that Paul considers himself UN-SAVED each time that he sins? NO.
Ed Chapman
I think you are missing the point in the book of Romans.
No… I’m not missing the point. Clearly Paul is discussing three categories of people, and one word called RIGHTEOUSNESS, which is portrayed as one being works, the other a gift without works, and he discusses when sin is imputed, vs. When sin is not.
Under the law, sin is imputed. For those not under the law, sin is not.
The law is earning eternal life, grace is not.
No one is held to account until one gets KNOWLEDGE of what their sins are.
That word, KNOWLEDGE is extremely important. That’s why the name of that tree in the garden has that name.
Our tree of KNOWLEDGE is the law of Moses.
Once introduced to the law, which is called the schoolmaster, then you are held to account.
The problem with your theology, is that you think you are held to account when you sin, but have no knowledge of it, just by virtue of the sin itself.
So, you get up to God, and God states, ANSWER FOR YOURSELF, for which you would say, I DIDN’T KNOW, and your god will say, IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE, YOU ARE SENTENCED TO BURN, BABY, BURN! GET OUT OF MY FACE, SINNER, YOU MAKE ME SICK!
THAT’S NOT MY GOD.
ED
I think you and I have gone about as far as we can in this conversation. Therefore, I bid you farewell!
Happy New Years Aidan! :-]
Thanks Br.d, and I certainly wish you the same.
Don’t forget Romans 5:13, 4:15 with your Romans 3:23…AND MOST IMPORTANT, VERSE 20 OF CHAPTER 3, JUST 3 VERSES BEFORE YOUR FAMOUS VERSE 23.
ED
And yet, all have sinned (both Jew and Gentile) and fall short of the glory of God.
But don’t forget – the wages of sin is death(Rom 6:23). That’s why – “God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)
There will be no second chances after death: “And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment.”(Heb. 9:27)
No one can remove these simple facts!
You keep telling me FOR THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH, and I keep retorting that WAGES IS SOMETHING EARNED BY WORKING, AND THE LAW OF MOSES IS ALL ABOUT WORKING, so YOU CAN’T EARN GRACE BY WORKING, HENCE ROMANS 4.
You don’t seem to think that Jesus has the POWER to save people AFTER DEATH? If that be the case, ROMANS 2:14-16, ROMANS 4 (ALL), 4:15, 5:13 NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN WRITTEN.
By the way, how many times did Lazarus die? He died TWICE. But that’s just a side note…
Abraham worked – James 2
See, I told you that you seem to think that Abraham worked…NO, HE DIDN’T WORK. James has nothing to do with Romans 4, where it clearaly states that Abraham DID NOT WORK. James is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT TOPIC OF CONVERSATION, not related to what we are discussing. I already explained Abraham’s WORK, in that he LIVED (WORKED) what he BELIEVED. Gonna kill his son, because he believed the PROMISE of God that his seed would continute thru the son that he was gonna kill, meaning that God would have to resurrect him from the dead, and he believed that God would do that to fulfill his promise…hence, faith without works is dead.
Romans 4 works is regarding THE LAW, where Abraham didn’t have THE LAW, thereofre, he didn’t WORK. Grace is a gift, and ya don’t work for grace.
Ed
Romans is dealing with WORKS OF LAW!
James is dealing with WORKS OF FAITH!
You don’t seem to get the difference!
You are still ….if you think that James use of the word works is related to the law, so that you can wrap Abraham under the law, too.
Ed Chapman
Tsk! tsk! tsk! I’m doing nothing of the sort Mr Strawman!
Yes, you are. WORKS was your main goal in you mentioning the book of James. No straws here…or at Starbucks, either.
Your main goal was to suggest that there are NO WORKS outside of the law of Moses, James proves otherwise and you know it!
Aidan states:
“1 Cor 1:17 – If no straws, man – then you agree that Paul is teaching the absolute necessity of baptism there.””
My resposne:
No, I don’t…Abraham, was he Baptised in water? Don’t give me that poor excuse that that was the OLDEN DAYS where it wasn’t required, because BAPTISM IS INDEED REQUIRED, but NOT WATER. NO WATER AT ALL will get you to heaven.
Romans 2:14-16, People who don’t even KNOW of a Jesus will be in heaven, and they will never be baptized with water. So, I don’t buy into your WATER Baptism.
Not even Moses was baptized in Water. They walked on DRY LAND thru the Red Sea. The only WET ONES were the Pharaoh’s people who drowned.
I only believe in the Baptism that Jesus gives, THE HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE. That’s the only one that counts. The water is JUST FOR A SHOW, so TAKE A BOW, and the AUDIENCE WILL GIVE YOU A STANDING OVATION for your SHOW of FAITH.
Ed Chapman
Ah! Something tells me in your response to 1 Cor. 1:17, that you do believe that the context of that passage actually reinforces baptism! Interesting!
No, I didn’t.
“Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.”
Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Cor. 1:12-13)
Tell me, for one to have belonged to Paul, what two things above would have needed to be fulfilled for that to happen? But who was crucified for them? Whose name had they been baptized in? Therefore, who did they rightly belong to?
This passage reinforces the absolute necessity of baptism.
The only thing that it re-inforces is: “I of Christ” Baptized in the Name of Christ. I never said that Baptism is NOT REQUIRED. I said WATER BAPTISM is NOT REQUIRED. The only thing that is required is the BAPTISM that Jesus gives, which is NOT WATER. And I reinforce Romans 2:14-16, they will get to heaven WITHOUT being dunked in water. Paul baptized only a handful of people on his journey. What magic does water do? IT’S CARNAL. The baptism that Jesus gives is SPIRITUAL, having nothing to do with water. Water is a metaphore. What THESE PEOPLE were arguing is:
0 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
The converation does NOT STOP…
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?
5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
And it CONTINUES…chapter 5, fornicaters in the church…kick them out of the church, they are NOT BROTHERS (NOT CHRISTIANS), kick them out of the church to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved.
PURGE OUT THE LEAVEN, FOR THEY ARE NOT BROTHERS, NOT SAVED, NEVER WERE.
2 Corinthians 13:5
Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building.
ED wrote: “The only thing that it re-inforces is: “I of Christ” Baptized in the Name of Christ. I never said that Baptism is NOT REQUIRED. I said WATER BAPTISM is NOT REQUIRED.”
AMCM:
Ah! But you are greatly mistaken about the baptism not being water in 1 Cor 1:12-13.
Baptism in the Name of Christ is defined as WATER BAPTISM in (Acts 10:47-48).
NO, it doesn’t. The definition of the word is simply IMMERSION, and water is not part of the definition. IF the baptism that Jesus gives is the HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE, then we are IMMERSED IN THE HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE, NOT WATER. All water is is a SHOW…CARNAL, NOT SPIRITUAL.
I’ve already explained what baptism of the Holy Spirit and baptism of fire is from Matthew 3.
And now you also ignore Peter’s definition of baptism in Jesus Name in (Acts 10: 47-48). Be it upon your own head!
Aidan,
Addendum to my last:
Galatians 5:1(KJV)
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
BONDAGE:
Galatians 4:24
…for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Ed Chapman
I agree, no one should go back to the Law of Moses!
Look what Paul told these Christians who were trying to go back to the Law of Moses.
(Gal. 5:4) “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”
They were never Christians to begin with, they who think salvation is within the law.
Oh yes they were Christians, as is very obvious from the context and grammar.
SEVERED FROM CHRIST:
(Gal. 5:4) Thayer says: “to be severed from, separated from, discharged from, loosed from, anyone; to terminate all contact with one (a pregnant construction, cf. Winers Grammar, 621 (577); Buttmann, 322 (277)):”
You cannot be severed from Christ if He never had a relationship with you in the first place. Your head cannot be severed from your body unless it is already attached. You sever the branch from the tree, you cut or sever the umbilical cord.
FALLEN FROM GRACE:
“You have fallen from grace” Thayer says: (from Homer down); to fall out of, to fall down from;
It seems they had fallen out of grace. Again, you cannot fall from grace if you were never “in grace” to begin with.
PAUL WAS REBUKING CHRISTIANS:
“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified.Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (Gal. 3:1-3)
“So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman.” (Gal. 4:31)
“For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.”
“You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.” (Gal. 5:1-4) – Clearly, they were Christians in danger from the Judaizers.
I don’t see anyone in the bible repenting after they are once in Christ. Repenting is something done before being baptised.
And, if you can lose your salvation, you are no longer inn Christ, therefore, for every sin you commit, you are lost again, no longer in Christ. So you gotta crucify Christ again, too atone for your future sins, again, and again, and again, meaning re-baptised several times.
Given my sarcasm, at what point do you lose your salvation?
Each sin? So what if you, repent later… between the sin and repent, you are lost, no longer a Christian, right? That means re-saved, re-baptism, re-everything.
Right? Get your story straight please.
And, bible references.
You have not studied, period. It’s obvious. You read everything but the verses I provided.
3 times I mention Romans 5:20, no response. Several times I mention Romans 5:13, 4:15… no response. Later you accuse me of inventing that idea. Like, right, I magically cast a spell to put that in your bible. Hardly.
You are not taking this serious enough, cuz ya got your mind already made up.
So go preach your version of it.
I’m done. I know what I know because I study.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
I don’t see anyone in the bible repenting after they are once in Christ. Repenting is something done before being baptised.
AMCM: (Acts 8:13-23)
“Even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip, and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was constantly amazed.” – Notice, the Holy Spirit says that, SIMON BELIEVED AND WAS BAPTIZED, which means he was SAVED (Mark 16:15-16). He was baptized into Christ (Gal. 3: 26-27).
“Now when the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent them Peter and John,”
“Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money,
But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money!”
“Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.
“For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bondage of iniquity.” – Notice, Peter calls on Simon to REPENT and PRAY FOR FORGIVENESS. And that Simon was now in the BONDAGE OF INIQUITY.
It’s no good trying to twist this by saying that Simon was never saved or was never a believer! The Holy Spirit tells us the he BELIEVED AND WAS BAPTIZED. Simon was a saved man yet when he sinned he was called on to REPENT and PRAY FOR FORGIVENESS. Take special note that Peter didn’t need to call on Simon to believe and be baptized again, because he’d already done that. He just calls on him now to repent of his sin and ask for forgiveness (1 Jn. 1:8-10). That’s basically all a Christian needs to do.
So, this passage just makes a complete nonsense out of everything you’ve said.
ED wrote:
“3 times I mention Romans 5:20, no response. Several times I mention Romans 5:13, 4:15… no response. Later you accuse me of inventing that idea. Like, right, I magically cast a spell to put that in your bible. Hardly.”
AMCM:
And I keep telling you to provide the proper context to those passages, because the burden of proof is on you – not me – to prove what you claim it’s teaching!
Aidan,
Keep the tub constantly full of water.
Kick the baby out, but keep the bathwater. Lol.
Ed Chapman
Oh, and a, rhutich,
Do you know what I didn’t read?
COMMENTARIES, and I dont’ own any bible with SIDENOTES, either. I never read ANY church father this or that, because, as I found out later, THEY WERE WRONG on a whole slew of things, and most of it was because they HATED the Jews who killed Jesus, like the attitude that Simon gave me regarding the MURDER, ,as he put it, of Jesus. We KNOW how much the Catholics (ROME) HATED the Jews, and so did LUTHER. WITH A PASSION they hated the Jews for killing Jesus.
Well, ya know what? I have the UTMOST respect for the Jews, MORE than I do for the MOST RIGHTEOUS CHRISTIAN on the planet.
Christians don’t even know HOW to deal with the Jews, somehow thinking that they can EVANGELIZE them. Not gonna happen, except for a FEW, called, REMNANT, and the REST are in a SLUMBER that God gave them, and no EVANGELIST is gonna change that.
But, them ROMAN dudes, called Catholics, HATED the Jews, as did those who defected Catholicism.
But ya, let’s listen to the Jew haters, cuz they KNOW SO MUCH! YUCK! ICKY! NO WAY! NOT ME.
Ed Chapman
They are without excuse… The Jews. Not mankind in general.
Ed Chapman
in Romans 1, there are pronouns of, THEY, THEM, ect. That is the Jews.
You have some serious study to do.
I am serious.
Ed Chapman
So do you!
Psalm 147:19-20 King James Version (KJV)
19 He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel.
20 He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the Lord.
Aidan,
The part that you DID NOT QUOTE of Acts 17:30 states:
Acts 17:30 King James Version (KJV)
30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at;
Ed Chapman
Vine: “to overlook” (an aorist form), is used in Act 17:30, RV (AV, “winked at”), i.e., God bore with them without interposing by way of punishment, though the debasing tendencies of idolatry necessarily developed themselves.”
Robertson adds that hupereido is an “old verb to see beyond, not to see, to overlook, not “to wink at” of the Authorized Version with the notion of condoning. Here only in the NT. It occurs in the Lxx in the sense of overlooking or neglecting (Ps 55:1-note). But it has here only a negative force. God has all the time objected to the polytheism of the heathen, and now he has made it plain.
As I said before on this verse, which you ignored, we have a God who is longsuffering, even so;
He is – “longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Pet. 3:9)
Dude, really? You look to commentaries?
The verse isn’t self explanatory to you, without consulting a commentator?
If there is any confusion, the words AFTER, “BUT NOW” should be a clue, so as to conclude the words prior to, “but”, meaning, just like your own version words it… overlooked, meaning, NO ONE REPENTED BEFORE, AND GOD EXCUSED IT.
ROMANS 5:13, AND 4:15.
I’M GONNA HAMMER THOSE TWO VERSES INTO YOUR HEAD UNTIL YOU FINALLY GET IT!
Ed Chapman
ED,wrote:
ROMANS 5:13, AND 4:15.
I’M GONNA HAMMER THOSE TWO VERSES INTO YOUR HEAD UNTIL YOU FINALLY GET IT!
AMCM:
Well, go on then! Since you’ve got it all figured out, tell us what the “immediate context” of those two verses are? You claim it’s so simple! You are the one making the assertions about Romans 4 and 5? So go on then, give us a proper exegesis of the immediate context of each!
I’M STILL WAITING!
If you can’t figure it out, from two self explanatory verses, I can’t help ya.
Delete those verses from your bible.
Ed Chapman
ASSERTIONS, ASSERTIONS, EMPTY ASSERTIONS!
Riiiiiggggghhhhhttttt.
Sorry! MERE ASSERTIONS, MERE ASSERTIONS, MERELY EMPTY ASSERTIONS!
Now it’s Riiiiiggggghhhhhttttt.
No assertions. I know the bible very well. You got Catholicism in your theology still.
Baggage baggage baggage.
Ed Chapman
With your PURGATORY for the wicked from Noah’s world.
Was it 2000 years they were suffering in torment before they got out of the torment side of Hades?
Aidan states:
“I think you are the one who has got Catholicism in your baggage!
With your PURGATORY for the wicked from Noah’s world.
Was it 2000 years they were suffering in torment before they got out of the torment side of Hades?”
My response:
Abraham’s BOSOM is NOT purgatory. There is no such thing as a purgatory. That PRISON, was Abraham’s bosom. Abraham was a PRISONER there. Jesus led CAPTIVE CAPTIVE. That prison was a RESTFUL PEACEFUL PLACE, NOT A TORMENT PLACE.
NO ONE could go to heaven UNTIL Jesus died on the cross. We don’t call that PURGATORY. It was the PLACE OF REST for the dead.
Ephesians 4:8
Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
chapmaned24 writes, “Romans 3:20 states, FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN. ”
Does “Law” only refer to the Law Of Moses?
In 2 Peter, “God did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly; and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds)–
9* then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority.”
Noah was a preacher of righteousness and the people are described as ungodly. Of Lot, he was “tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds…” God knows how to reserve the unjust. All this speaks to the knowledge of law. However, one does not have to sin in order to be described as ungodly/unrighteous/wicked.
rhutchin,
From my study…YES…99 percent of the time.
The other 1 percent is the law of liberty, law of faith, law of Christ… all of which is the same law.
rhutchin,
I always thought that Jesus died for sinners. So all Gentiles who died before Jesus came on the scene are burning in hell?
That’s one HELL…PUN INTENDED, of a population in hell. I can’t buy that logic.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
There are a couple of times that the word, LAW is in reference to, TORAH, as in MATTHEW 5:17-18, and a few others. How can you tell? The words, “and the prophets” accompany the word, law. In that case, the Torah, aka, law, is Genesis thought Deuteronomy. Otherwise, the word law is the OLD TESTAMENT, which begins in Exodus 20, not Genesis 1, also known as, THE LAW OF MOSES, or, simply, THE LAW.
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
You quote John 3:16, WITHOUT, of course, mentioning ONE WORD about Romans 10, in that, in order to NOT BELIEVE in Jesus, ONE MUST FIRST BE PRESENTED WITH THE STORY ABOUT JESUS.
That’s the ONLY WAY that one can be an UNBELIEVER of Jesus. Those who have NO KNOWLEDGE OF A JESUS, the default is…ROMANS 2, JUDGED BY THEIR CONSCIENCE, NOT UNDER THE LAW.
Man oh man, you have some learning to do:
Romans 10:14-15
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
Those who have NO HEARD, are NOT the ones who will PERISH, just because YOU SAY, that they don’t believe in him.
You can’t believe, or not believe until YOU make a choice, and that choice is BASED ON SOMEONE PREACHING.
But to you, the DEFAULT is HELL HELL HELL for everyone who’s not heard, because they are SINNERS, SINNERS, THEY ARE UNGODLY, JUDGMENT, SINNER!
Get away from the MILK, and start eating some meat.
YOU are the reason that many HATE Christians today. Judgmental to the max. Point fingers at people telling them they are all going to hell? Might as well belong to that HATEFUL Baptist church that loves to condemn soldiers at their funerals.
Ed Chapman
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (Jn 3:16)
Why did God give His Son for the world? Because the world was already perishing my friend!
No matter how sarcastic you are, and no matter how many hoops you try to jump through, you cannot get away from the truth stated here, in just this one verse.
You can have the last word in this thread, I’m done! If you can ignore plain passages of scripture like this, you are in serious trouble my friend!
Keep safe,
Aidan.
Aidan,
My last word:
Perish:
Job 34:15
All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust.
1 Samuel 27:1
And David said in his heart, I shall now perish one day by the hand of Saul:
Esther 3:13
And the letters were sent by posts into all the king’s provinces, to destroy, to kill, and to cause to perish, all Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in one day, even upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar, and to take the spoil of them for a prey.
Esther 4:16
Go, gather together all the Jews that are present in Shushan, and fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night or day: I also and my maidens will fast likewise; and so will I go in unto the king, which is not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish.
Esther 7:4
For we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish.
Ecclesiastes 7:15
All things have I seen in the days of my vanity: there is a just man that perisheth in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man that prolongeth his life in his wickedness.
Isaiah 57:1
The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come.
Matthew 8:25 (a boating trip, rough seas)
And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish.
Matthew 26:52
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
Mark 4:38
And he was in the hinder part of the ship, asleep on a pillow: and they awake him, and say unto him, Master, carest thou not that we perish?
Luke 8:24
And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master, master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was a calm.
Luke 11:51
From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple
Luke 13:33
Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.
Luke 15:17
And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father’s have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!
2 Corinthians 4:16
For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.
I stand by my point regarding the word PERISH.
Perish is the LAST WORD.
Ed Chapman
Strawman argument!
Because, it can either be ‘literal’ or ‘figurative’ depending on the context.
literal or figurative….HMMMM. ISn’t that what I SAID TO BEGIN WITH?
I said that PERISH means “die”, and that it can be EITHER NATURAL DEATH, OR SPIRITUAL DEATH…BUT YOU WEREN’T HAVING ANY OF IT.
The context of those in the flood, they DIED A NATURAL DEATH, PERISHED. Not for judgment of eternal damnation.
No one is in heaven except WICKED Abraham, who NEVER REPENTED of his sins, and a few others, huh?
Romans 5:13 ENDS THE DISCUSSION, Aidan.
Ed Chapman
ED,said:
“said that PERISH means “die”, and that it can be EITHER NATURAL DEATH, OR SPIRITUAL DEATH…BUT YOU WEREN’T HAVING ANY OF IT.”
AMCM: – Only because you keep applying it – out of context!
“By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.” (Heb 11:7)
But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Pet. 3:7,9)
I believe these verses speak for themselves!
Aidan,
Romans 5:13 King James Version (KJV)
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 4:15 King James Version (KJV)
15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
MIC DROP, OUT A HERE!
Ed Chapman
Sounds more like you – DROPPED THE BALL!
Why don’t you try giving the context before you misapply verses?
Nope… Mic drop. Romans 5:13, 4:15.
Ed Chapman
ED: Nope… Mic drop. Romans 5:13, 4:15.
AMCM: C’mon then, give us a little exegesis on those passages!
Oops! You keep dropping that ball.
I don’t have to do your homework for you. Those verses are self explanatory.
I can’t believe you need EXE-JESUS from that.
But here’s the exegesis… read the bible as a novel, and figure out what works is.
That’s on you. I’ve already did my homework.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
“I’ve already did my homework.” “Those verses are self explanatory”
AMCM:
Ah! Well then, you’ve had to do no homework at all – seeing that they are so self explanatory.
But, what I asked you, was to give an exegesis of the verses in the immediate context of Rom. 4:15; and 5:13. Otherwise, your hollow assertions have no bearing on this subject!
They are self explanatory.
The exe-JESUS you speak of is for you to discover on your own, and when you do, you learn what works is all about.
Yes, JUDGE DR-ED.
1 “What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh?
2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.” (Rom. 4:1-2)
Hmmmm!! If Abraham was justified by works? Interesting, very interesting!
Flesh and works is the law of Moses. Abraham didn’t have that. That’s what it’s saying.
He didn’t WORK. THAT’S what it’s saying.
Work work work work is the law of Moses… and Abraham didn’t work.
Keep reading. For where no law is, there is no transgression.
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
NO… IN ROMANS 4, ABRAHAM IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY WORKS.
You mistake the word, IF as the word, SINCE.
In the book of James, ABRAHAM IS justified by works, but not in Romans 4.
Two different works.
Law and faith are contrary to one another. They do not goo together. The law is not of faith. Abraham didn’t have the law.
And, you didn’t answer my question to 1 Corinthians 15:56.
All you did was to redirect.
Why do you do that? Focus!
Ed Chapman
More STRAWMAN ARGUMENTS I SEE
Aidan,
This is the 3rd time I’ve said the following.
Click on my name. That’s my blog. Scroll down to the post of “Saving faith…”
That explains it.
You haven’t seen it yet, and I’ve suggested twice before.
Ed Chapman
I’m working Ed. Time is of the essence here.
Ha… So am i. I shouldn’t be on here. Lol.
What did Adam say about Christmas? Hey! It’s Christmas Eve.
That’s found in the book of Aidan, chapter 3, VERSE 12, i think.
Ed Chapman
Speaking of works…Hebrews chapter 4. The sabbath, discussed in a spiritual manner. We are in God’s rest… No works.
We are in God’s Sabbath, his 7th Day.
Hebrews chapter 4 is another reference to what I speak.
But, that may be TMI for you at this time.
Ed Chapman
I’m sure you’ve got it all figured out!
Sher! Aren’t ya a great fella altogether!
I do.
Ed Chapman
It’s all about the law, vs. No law.
You haven’t figured out yet, that when the word, WORK, WORKS, DEEDS, DO, ect., those words pertain to the law of Moses.
The book of James is excluded from that. That book is in regards to living your faith.
The law of Moses, however, is not of faith, but of works.
Learn those words.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
You haven’t figured out yet, that when the word, WORK, WORKS, DEEDS, DO, ect., those words pertain to the law of Moses.
AMCM:
Boy! JUDGE DR-ED, you’re so fixated on the LAW, THE LAW OF MOSES!
You don’t have to be under the Law of Moses to be under law! That’s what I keep telling you! But you are not listening. There’s the law of Christ, and also the Gentiles, who Paul says manifested “a law unto themselves.” (Rom. 2:14-16)
14 “for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves,
15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)
16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.”
Yes, I am fixated on it, because the book of Romans is fixated on it.
The book of Romans is distinguishing the difference between those who fall under it, THE JEWS, vs those NOT, the rest of us.
And the word works is regarding those who are under the law of Moses, NO ONE ELSE.
It would be nice if YOU would learn that, so that you would learn the EXEJESUS of Romans 4, and 5:13. No works.
For the wages of sin…
wages is earned by…WORKING…
THE LAW.
No law, no working.
Ed Chapman
Those people you mention in Romans 2:14… they are NOT WORKING. THEY ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW OF MOSES. THEY WILL NOT BE JUDGED BY THE LAW OF MOSES.
THEY WILL BE JUDGED BASED ON THEIR CONSCIENCE.
WHEN THE GENTILES…. WHO HAVE NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT THE LAW, IS HOW THE SENTENCE BEGINS.
IF THEIR CONSCIENCE DOES NOT CONVICT THEIR MINDS, THEN THEY ARE INNOCENT.
BUT THEY WON’T BE JUDGED BY… THE LAW OF MOSES.
WORKS… LEARN WHAT THAT IS.
ED
ED wrote:
IF THEIR CONSCIENCE DOES NOT CONVICT THEIR MINDS, THEN THEY ARE INNOCENT.
AMCM:
AND HOW MANY OF THEM WILL HAVE LIVED PERFECTLY, ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF THEIR CONSCIENCE?
ON THAT BASIS, HOW MANY OF THEM WILL BE FOUND INNOCENT?
That’s what JESUS will judge, according to Paul, so it will be based on their conscience to God, and you and I are not their judge, so please stop condemning all of them to hell. Paul calls this stuff, GOSPEL.
No matter what they do, it’s not gonna be, the law of Moses, that judges them.
You conclude that because they don’t know Jesus, they will be in hell by default, all because they are wicked sinners who never repented.
Amazon people with bones in nose, spears in hand, all going to hell, because they never accepted Jesus to forgive them of their sins by repenting of sins, AND YET, THEY NEVER HEARD OF THE DUDE CALLED JESUS.
But you, if you were Jesus, would send them to hell, by default.
In glad you ain’t Jesus.
Ed Chapman
By the same token, neither can you JUDGE that they will go to heaven!
But in the meantime, I preach what I’m called to preach by His word!
“and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (Luke 24:46)
And “all nations” does in no way exclude – “Amazon people with bones in nose, spears in hand.”
AND, that command COMES FROM JESUS.
Whom you don’t seem to have a problem defying!
Yes, I can. The bible tells us that those born of God Can’t sin, it also states before the law, sin was in the world, but where no law is, sin is not imputed, there’s no transgression. It also states that God overlooked ignorance, it also states that the law is the strength of sin, and so much more that we haven’t looked at yet, cuz you are still in Romans 1 and part of 2, and a couple verses in 6.
Move on and keep reading.
But, i know you. You’ll delete verses you don’t like, and reword them to say, FOR GOD SO HATED THE WORLD, THAT ALL THOSE GENTILES WHO DIED BEFORE HIS SON DIED IN THE CROSS… SUCKS BEING THEM. BUT NOW…
YOU REALLY DON’T LIKE HAVING TO DEAL WITH JOHN 3:16, DO YOU?
The world is PERISHING ED!
You don’t like that Jesus died for the ungodly.
They are precisely the ones who are PERISHING ED! (John 3:16)
And unless you repent you will PERISH!
I already did repent. No need for FURTHER repentance, since I can’t sin (1 John 3:9).
Ed Chapman
What is mercy, and why did Paul get mercy? Special?
And yet, JUDGE DR-ED, Paul had plenty knowledge of sin under THE LAW, THE LAW!
Aidan,
You state, Paul had plenty of knowledge of sin under, THE LAW.
MY RESPONSE.
OBVIOUSLY, you didn’t read romans 7:7-9.
There was once upon a time that he didn’t know. Sin was dead, and he was alive.
once her found out, he died and sin was alive.
Next, he’s dead in Christ, dead to sin, sin is dead, dead to the law.
Paul still struggles with sin, but saved forever, all because he died in Christ, and dead people can’t sin. Can’t. You say they can, but the bible states otherwise.
Read and understand.
Ed Chapman
Thank you for confirming that PAUL had plenty knowledge of sin before he came to Christ.
And Christians DO SIN!
If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. (1 Jn 1:8-10)
Are you making Him a liar?
I’ll bet you were a real hoot in high school.
What makes the Teflon stick to the pan?
Laughter…L, A, U, G, H, T, E, R.
DAUGHTER, OR DAFTER?
A little Gallagher humor for ya to force you to THINK.
But if ya don’t want to think, just delete verses from your bible that you don’t like. I hear that Luther thought about doing that. Some say Thomas Jefferson did, too.
Ed Chapman
YOU MEAN VERSES LIKE?
Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
OR, HOW ABOUT?
Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh.
For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
OR, EVEN!
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
Oh! I’d say there’s quite a few more verses like these you’d like to have cut out of the bible!
This is not so much a matter of knowledge, but rather, what’s in the heart.
Really? This is what you present? Wow.
First of all… who was Peter talking to? Jews, under THE LAW OF MOSES. NO ONE ELSE. Those Jews know the law. Therefore they know what to repent from.
Next… living by the flesh is…THE LAW OF MOSES.
LIVING BY THE SPIRIT IS… THE LAW OF CHRIST.
If you died with Christ, you are dead to sin. Die, dead. If you are dead, it’s impossible to live in the flesh. Therefore, you are not under the law of Moses, and therefore it’s impossible for dead people to sin.
In surprised that you can’t connect the dots with words and phrases.
obviously, you never DIED WITH CHRIST, so you obey the law of Moses, working, which is all about the flesh, therefore, you can’t in the spirit.
To reiterate… The law of Moses is for the flesh. The law off Christ is for three spirit. Two different laws. 613 commandments vs TWO. Which do you prefer?
Ed Chapman
Yes, Peter was talking to Jews first, But the promise of Acts 2:38 was not just for the Jew, but also for the Gentiles.
“For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:39)
And yet, still spoken to Christians who could possibly die.
“For if you live according to the flesh you will die;” (Rom. 8:13)
You forgot to mention John 3:16, about the WORLD PERISHING.
There was no Gentile that Peter was talking to. only the Jews would know what to repent from. You talk exe-JESUS, but don’t apply it.
Look at v.39, I’m sure you can figure it out.
So what you are saying is that those died in the flood are from Jupiter? God didn’t love them? Jesus didn’t die for their sins?
Jesus only died for the godly?
Your thinning is weird.
Ed Chapman
By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. (HEB 11:7)
What’s your point? Noah wasn’t under the law.
Heir of Righteousness!
Go figure it out!
Aidan quotes:
”
What’s your point? Noah wasn’t under the law.
Heir of Righteousness!
Go figure it out!”
My response…THE LAW IS NOT OF FAITH. Abraham is HEIR of the Promise, too. BOTH NEVER WORKED FOR IT.
So, again, what’s your point? Two people (Abraham and Noah, DIDN’T WORK to get RIGHTEOUSNESS. They BOTH were not under the law, which is WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Deuteronomy 6:25
And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.
NOTE THE WORDS, “RIGHTEOUSNESS”, AND “DO”…DO IS WORK, DEED. We call this, SELF RIGHTEOUSNESS, Paul calls it a WAGE for WORKING, but these WAGES are DEATH.
NO LAW IS GOD’S RIGHTEOUSNESS…AS A GIFT…NO WORK.
DEUTERONOMY 6:25, THE LAW, SELF RIGHTEOUSNESS, WORKS, DEEDS, ETC.
Ed Chapman
So if people died before Jesus came on the scene, all Gentiles are burning in hell. Is that your real conclusion?
Ah! Sher! Why don’t you just throw out whatever comes into yer head.
Do you know how I can tell that you’ve never read the bible? Because you’ve never heard the verses before that I’ve provided.
That’s because, whatever you provided is not taught in the scriptures!
Now, that’s a NOVEL IDEA.
Aidan said:
“That’s because, whatever you provided is not taught in the scriptures!
Now, that’s a NOVEL IDEA.””
So WHO inserted Romans 5:13, 4:15, 1 John 3:9 in your bibles, then? ME?
Not likely, buddy.
Ed Chapman
Stop dismissing Romans 4:15, and Romans 5:13.
Ed Chapman
You mean, stop dismissing your version of it!
My version? My version?
You mean, the KJV? WHAT VERSION ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
WHAT VERSION do you use?
Ed Chapman
I mean your twisted version of the truth (2 Pt 3:16).
Aidan,
Man….Or, should I say, ADAM? I’ve been studying this stuff for years.
Jesus died for the ungodly, didn’t he? Past, present, and future.
And you are trying to tell me that Jesus didn’t die for those in the flood.
You wrote Peter, yet, ignore that Jesus went to preach to those who died in the flood… them ungodly people that Jesus died for.
You are merciless. I’d hate for you to be Jesus.
For Aidan so hates the world, that Aidan only died for the people who repented, the godly. Who cares if they don’t know what to repent from. Who cares if they don’t know about a Savior. Who cares? Let ’em burn, them wicked people.
No mercy, take no prisoners
It’s you, Aidan, that can’t understand Paul.
No offense, man, but Catholics have no understanding of anything, and ya brought some baggage with ya, no different than reformers did.
Ed Chapman
And all that you’ve said here in this post is just pure nonsense.
A strawman
What does 1 Corinthians 15:56 say about sin?
The strength of sin is, what?
The law.
Remove… The law… sin has no strength.
Read it. Learn it. Live it. LOVE it.
Ed Chapman
“Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” (1 Jn. 3:4)
It seems men have been doing this since the beginning of time.
Read it. But don’t learn it. Don’t live it. And certainly don’t LOVE it.
That’s not the KJV.
KJV STATES, “SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW.
Gotta love them modern English goofed up translations.
1 John 3:4 is about those under the LAW OF MOSES. ONLY.
THEN, WE GO DOWN A FEW VERSES LATER, VERSE 9, THOSE BORN OFF GOD CANNOT SIN.
SIN UNDER THE LAW, BORN OF GOD, CAN’T SIN… CUZ YOU’RE DEAD… IN CHRIST, FREED FROM SIN, DEAD TO SIN.
ED
ED wrote:
That’s not the KJV.
KJV STATES, “SIN IS THE TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW.
The NASB gives the proper sense of it from the greek!
NASB – “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” (1 Jn 3:4)
Aidan states:
“The NASB gives the proper sense of it from the greek!
NASB – “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.” (1 Jn 3:4)”
OK, I bite…
In order for there to BE PEOPLE PRACTICING LAWLESSNESS, there must first be LAW SET IN PLACE. But I’m not so sure that the NASB is really giving the PROPER SENSE OF IT FROM THE GREEK.
Why? BECAUSE ROMANS 3:20, FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN, AND, ROMANS 4:15, WHERE NO LAW IS, THERE IS NO “TRANSGRESSION” (or, you could use your LAWLESSNESS, I suppose, because where no law is, THERE IS NO LAWLESSNESS.
But ya, I’m not only ONE OF THEM, I proudly wear the badge! I thought that you would LOVE the KJV…after all, it came from YOUR SIDE OF THE POND, in the nation of SIMON. What’s up with these strange NEW MODERN ENGLISH STUFF?
Just betwixt thou and I, whateth iseth thiseth neweth Englisheth stuffeth alleth abouteth?
Ed Chapman.
Aidan,
From the KJV, read 1 John 3:4, then immediately go to Romans 4:15.
Aidan,
Addendum to my last word…
Based on you, apparently, those who died in the flood, God didn’t love them at all, cuz THEY WERE NOT THE WORLD that God loved?
Your version would look something like this:
For God so loved the world…except those who died in the flood, that he gave his only begotten son, to those who BELIEVE IN HIM, EXCEPT THOSE WHO NEVER HEARD OF HIM, cuz DAYZ BEEZ BURNIN IN HAIL FAR! PERISHED FOR ETERNITEEEZ.
Ed Chapman
ED wrote:
“Based on you, apparently, those who died in the flood, God didn’t love them at all, cuz THEY WERE NOT THE WORLD that God loved?”
AMCM:
“By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.”
NOTICE what it said, again: – “by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.” Out of that ungodly world, only Noah became – the heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. Therefore, by NECESSARY INFERENCE, that ungodly world were truly “condemned”! They had every opportunity, same as Noah and his family, to seek after God, but they chose otherwise! Noah and his family were saved because they chose to seek after God and serve Him.
“But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” (Heb. 11:6)
Once you die there are no second chances – but judgment!
“And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.” (Heb. 9:27)
They were judged…found INNOCENT of the charges, due to NO KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.
The epistle of Peter declares that Jesus went to PREACH TO THEM.
If they were as UNGODLY as you say, then Jesus died for them, too. HELLO?
Ed Chapman
Aidan,
Based on YOUR theology, NO ONE is in heaven, except for Abraham, and a few others, all because THEY DIDN’T “REPENT”, AND didn’t have…FAITH.
Can you POINT ME to the verse that states that Abraham REPENTED of his sins?
Ed Chapman
No, but I can point you to a some verses that imply it, namely, (Rom. 4:5-8)
No… If a person sins… under the law, sin is imputed. Your Romans 4:8 is about ABRAHAM… verse 15, and Romans 5:13.
Ed Chapman
There you go again, conveniently ignoring (v.7) while only referencing (v.8) to suit your own assumptions!
Here is as good a definition as any, to what it means to be justified and accounted as righteous.
6 “just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.” (Rom. 4:6-8)
This, therefore, is what it means for the one who “believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness” (v.5)
And it certainly isn’t going to happen to the ‘impenitent’ unbeliever!
Aidan,
Works, your verse 6, is the law of Moses. Righteousness, without the law. No one outside of the law of Moses works for righteousness.
Then comes, verse 8.
So again,
Romans 4:15… finish reading.
Then Romans 5:13.
Very convenient that you dismiss those.
Ed Chapman
Aiden writes, “ED Teaches: OUTSIDE OF THE LAW OF MOSES, NO SIN IMPUTED, even tho, FOR ALL HAVE SINNED. That even the Ungodly in Noah’s day will not be condemned! ”
In Genesis 6, we read, “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
So, even without the Law of Moses, the people were judged and destroyed because of their wickedness.
rhutchin,
NO, they were judged to die from THIS LIFE, because the NT states that Jesus died for the UNGODLY, and we all acknowledge that they were UNGODLY, therefore, Jesus died for THEM, TOO. And the Epistle of Peter tells us that Jesus went to PREACH to them. Therefore, they were NOT JUDGED FOR ETERNAL HELL FIRE.
Ed Chapman
rhutchin,
Besides, what did them poor little birds do to deserve their destruction? I can understand CREEPING things…nobody likes CREEPING things, but birds? LOL.
Ed Chapman
br.d: “If [X] is not determined in advance *FOR* the creature”
rhutchin: “If God is not omniscient, you are correct, “If [X] is not determined in advance *FOR* the creature…” However, God is omniscient, so your statements are irrelevant as they do not apply.”
br.d: “Sorry this is the fallacy of false dichotomy.”
LOL!!! There is no false dichotomy which explains why you did not identify it or a viable alternative. This is a truism, “That God is omniscient means that all things are certain, thereby determined.”
Then, “Your own personal and skewed conception of what is facilitated by Middle-knowledge.”
LOL!!! When cornered, make things up.
br.d: “If [X] is not determined in advance *FOR* the creature”
rhutchin: “If God is not omniscient, you are correct, “If [X] is not determined in advance *FOR* the creature…” However, God is omniscient, so your statements are irrelevant as they do not apply.”
br.d: “Sorry this is the fallacy of false dichotomy.”
Your own personal and skewed conception of what is facilitated by Middle-knowledge.
rhutchin
LOL!!! There is no false dichotomy which explains why you did not identify it or a viable alternative. This is a truism, “That God is omniscient means that all things are certain, thereby determined.”
br
Again with the fallacy of false dichotomy
As Middle knowledge facilitates both omniscience of what creatures would do in any circumstance without having to determine it *FOR* the creature.
Internet Encyclopedia – Middle Knowledge
-quote
“Middle Knowledge…..the compatibility of divine providence and creaturely LIBERTARIAN freedom”
Thomas P. Flint
-quote
“The Molinist picture of providence combines a strong, traditional notion of divine providence with a LIBERTARIAN account of freedom”
William Lane Craig
-quote
“Molinism with Middle Knowledge as a part of divine omniscience presupposes LIBERTARIAN free will as opposed to compatibilism.”
Sorry rhutchin!
You appear to have a version of Middle Knowledge which is not shared by any of academic literature.
As you occasionally call it – “a personal philosophy”.
RH says: “this is a truism, “That God is omniscient means that all things are certain, thereby determined.””
This is a true statement only if one accepts the unique Calvinist definition of “omniscient”. However, that statement is not a “truism”, unless there is a special Calvinist definition for that as well…
Good comment Carl.
Yes – I think that subject is one in which the Calvinist moves into a world of double-think.
They want to say the THEOS determines all things – which leaves nothing left over for the creature to determine.
And then one can boast that that position respects divine sovereignty.
Well it also presents no problem for them in the context of “good” events.
Its when they have to address the context of “evil” events they need to find ways of escaping what logically follows from that position.
99% I just watch and wait.
And its totally predictable – to watch them SMUGGLE in various forms of IN-determinism in camouflaged form.
All sorts of subtly crafted (and sometimes downright ingenious) double-speak.
Carl writes, “This is a true statement only if one accepts the unique Calvinist definition of “omniscient”.”
The Calvinist definition of “omniscience,” takes past and present knowledge (a given for God) and adds perfect foreknowledge of future events. So, your quibble with the Calvinists must be with the issue of foreknowledge.
How about giving us your “non-unique” definition of “omniscience” with particular attention to, “foreknowledge?
rhutchin
That God is omniscient means that all things are certain, thereby determined
rhutchin
The Calvinist definition of “omniscience,” takes past and present knowledge (a given for God) and adds perfect foreknowledge of future events. So, your quibble with the Calvinists must be with the issue of foreknowledge.
br.d
rhutchin – Carl was obviously responding specifically to the notion that omniscience necessitates everything be determined *FOR* the creature.
Divine omniscience encompassing perfect knowledge past/present/future is certainly not unique to Calvinism.
I think we all know – Universal Divine Causal Determinism – is what makes Calvinism unique.
br.d writes, “Carl was obviously responding specifically to the notion that omniscience necessitates everything be determined *FOR* the creature.”
I guess that is why Carl said, “if one accepts the unique Calvinist definition of “omniscient”. ”
Then, “Divine omniscience encompassing perfect knowledge past/present/future is certainly not unique to Calvinism.”
Yep. So, why does Carl think it is? Perhaps, Carl did not mean to malign the Calvinists on the definition of “omniscience,” but on the Calvinist conclusion about the implications of omniscience. As WC Craig has shown, God’s perfect knowledge of future events makes those events certain. If future events are certain, then something would have to determine them (make them necessary).
br.d
Then, “Divine omniscience encompassing perfect knowledge past/present/future is certainly not unique to Calvinism.”
rhutchin
Yep. So, why does Carl think it is?
br.d
Well I’m guessing your just playing a game here – because its pretty obvious he was responding to your post about determinism.
rhutchin
Perhaps, Carl did not mean to malign the Calvinists on the definition of “omniscience,” but on the Calvinist conclusion about the implications of omniscience.
br.d
Are you sure it was meant to malign?
Just because someone acknowledges that Calvinism has a unique view of omniscience due to making it necessitate determinism?
rhutchin
As WC Craig has shown, God’s perfect knowledge of future events makes those events certain. If future events are certain, then something would have to determine them (make them necessary).
br.d
Since the fallacy of conflating certainty with necessity is widely known – I’m surprised you keep falling into it.
When Dr. Craig speaks of “certainty” he is speaking of an EPISTEMIC quality – as per the quote below.
William Lane Craig
-quote
One frequently finds in the writings of contemporary theological fatalists statements that slide from affirming that something is certain to affirming that it is necessary. This is sheer confusion. Certainty is a PROPERTY OF PERSONS and has nothing to do with truth, as is evident from the fact that WE CAN BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN about something that turns out to be false. In so doing he simply commits a common logical fallacy.
Thus, philosopher Susan Haack rightly calls the argument for theological fatalism “a needlessly (and confusingly) elaborated version” of Greek fatalism; THE ADDITION OF AN OMNISCIENT GOD to the argument constitutes a “gratuitous detour” around the real issue, which is the truth or falsity of future-tense statements.
(What does God know pg 9)
br.d quotes Craig, “William Lane Craig -quote
…Certainty is a PROPERTY OF PERSONS and has nothing to do with truth, as is evident from the fact that WE CAN BE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN about something that turns out to be false. In so doing he simply commits a common logical fallacy. ”
The discussion here is about certainty derived from God’s omniscience and it tells us that the future is certain. God’s omniscience is never absolutely certain about something that turns out to be false.
Then, ‘Thus, philosopher Susan Haack rightly calls the argument for theological fatalism “a needlessly (and confusingly) elaborated version” of Greek fatalism; THE ADDITION OF AN OMNISCIENT GOD to the argument constitutes a “gratuitous detour” around the real issue, which is the truth or falsity of future-tense statements.”
It should be obvious that God’s omniscience verifies the truth or falsity of future-tense statements. God’s omniscience does not tell us how future events come to pass, so maybe that is her point. However, Ephesians 1, tells us more about how future events come to pass for “God works all things according to the counsel of His will.” Even this does not tell us the means that God uses to work all things according to His will. We know that it is God who has determined the future and His omniscience testifies to this.
br.d
William Lane Craig
-quote
One frequently finds in the writings of contemporary theological fatalists statements that slide from affirming that something is certain to affirming that it is necessary. This is sheer confusion.
rhutchin
The discussion here is about certainty derived from God’s omniscience and it tells us that the future is certain. ….etc
br.d
FALSE
This is just doubling-down on the fallacy of fatalism.
Craig would never say “certainty is derived from God’s omniscience” because that language infers fatalism.
And Craig would never say divine certainty of events entails necessity of events
That conflation is something you have added to his statements.
Why quote Dr. Craig if you are simply going to contradict Dr. Craig?
rhutchin
God’s omniscience is never absolutely certain about something that turns out to be false.
br.d
This is a foundational premise – and all it says is that divine omniscience is perfect knowledge and thus without error.
But as Dr. Craig says – to slide from affirming that something is certain to affirming that it is necessary is sheer confusion.
William Lane Craig continues:
-quote
Thus, philosopher Susan Haack rightly calls the argument for theological fatalism “a needlessly (and confusingly) elaborated version” of Greek fatalism; THE ADDITION OF AN OMNISCIENT GOD to the argument constitutes a “gratuitous detour” around the real issue, which is the truth or falsity of future-tense statements.
rhutchin
God’s omniscience does not tell us how future events come to pass, so maybe that is her point.
br.d
Any ADULT thinker should be able to see why Dr. Craig includes Dr. Haack’s quote on his point of concerning the fallacy of conflating certainty with necessity. It simply affirms what is recognized by all academic literature
You can choose to MAKE-BELIEVE Dr. Haack’s statement means something else if you want to.
We’ve all seen this as a consistent strategy when your faced with academic quotes
They can’t possibly mean what they say.
But that is easily understandable as an evasion strategy.
rhutchin
Ephesians 1, tells us more about how future events come to pass for “God works all things according to the counsel of His will.” Even this does not tell us the means that God uses to work all things according to His will. We know that it is God who has determined the future and His omniscience testifies to this.
br.d
You’ve made this claim a thousand times – and – its the Calvinist’s story and he’s stickin to it
And here is Dr. Craig’s response:
-quote
“It needs to be kept in mind that Universal Divine Causal Determinism is an *INTERPRETATION* of Scripture.
An interpretation that some Reformed divines themselves regard as irreconcilable with other clear teachings of Scripture.
When one’s INTERPRETATION leads one into this sort of Cul-de-sac (i.e. A LOGICAL DEAD END), it is a good idea to reasses whether one has indeed rightly interpreted scripture. (Four Views on Divine Providence)
IRRATIONAL thinking will always result in an IRRATIONAL interpretation of any data
Whether that data is scripture or not.
Note the verse says ‘God works all things according to the counsel of His will’ and not ‘God worked all things according to the counsel of His will’. Rather than a past tense predetermination of all future events, we have a God who works, in real time, with the choices and actions of men – even the poor and wicked choices – to create something positive and productive.
To paraphrase, ‘God still works’.
Merry Christmas to all, before the activities begin in my neck of the woods.
Merry Christmas to all my brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus!
Merry Christmas, Phillip, and TO ALL, a good night!
Ed Chapman
Thank you very much Phillip!
Very ward Christmas and New Year to you and your family!
Aidan,
Merry Christmas my brother!! I had fun at our debate, and I hope you did, too. I don’t get offend. I dish it out, AND I can take it, too. I was like this at my professional work, too, in the US Navy, but AFTER WORK…different story.
As they say, “I’m a BUDNA (BUSINESS) MAN! So, in light of the Christmas season, I call a TRUCE!
Your friend in Christ,
Ed Chapman
Ed, “in light of the Christmas season, I call a TRUCE!”
Bugs Bunny! “Of course you realize this means WAR!”
Likewise, I don’t get offended too easily. As long as people don’t go too far, and it’s kept in check (Brdmod), then nobody gets huyt (Bugs bunny accent). You learn a few things when you grow up in a family of nine kids,(7 lads, 2 girls) which was average. And when father, brothers, meself, were in the military, you know that slagging (roasting?) comes with the territory. But nowadays, being a Christian, I tries to be more careful and don’ts debate with me personal vendetta aside me!
Enjoy the Holiers,
Aidan.
A question for rhutchin:
Are you an A or B theory of time guy?
For the peanut gallery, B theory would hold that God created the universe instantly as a 4 dimensional block. He exists outside of that block and can perceive any moment in the future of past by looking at the appropriate location….
Carl writes, “For the peanut gallery, B theory would hold that God created the universe instantly as a 4 dimensional block. He exists outside of that block and can perceive any moment in the future of past by looking at the appropriate location….”
If B Theory has says God “can perceive any moment in the future of past by looking at:…” then I am not B Theory. If God gains knowledge by observing future events, then God is not omniscient.
I believe that God has an infinite understanding of His creation and that understanding enables God to work all things after the counsel of His will. Because God works (or ordains) all things, God knows all things He has ordained and is omniscient. God’s knowledge is not derived from observing/learning anything outside Himself.
rhutchin
God’s knowledge is not derived from observing/learning anything outside Himself.
br.d
And for you – are “knowledge” and “infinite understanding” synonymous?
And in such case – you would say:
Calvin’s god’s infinite understanding is not derived from observing/learning anything outside Himself?
br.d writes, “…are “knowledge” and “infinite understanding” synonymous?”
No. Based on Ephesians 1, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will…,” Infinite understanding enables the counsel of God’s will, and God’s works enable knowledge.
br.d
In your mind are “knowledge” and “infinite understanding” synonymous?
rhutchin
No. Based on Ephesians 1, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will…,” Infinite understanding enables the counsel of God’s will, and God’s works enable knowledge.
br.d
Please provide the specific verses which stipulate what “enables” what.
And also – in your mind perfect knowledge of [X] does not equate to infinite understanding of [X]?
br.d writes, ‘Please provide the specific verses which stipulate what “enables” what.”
Let’s change what I said to, “Infinite understanding is part of the counsel of God’s will, and God’s works are known to God.
Then, “And also – in your mind perfect knowledge of [X] does not equate to infinite understanding of [X]?”
Both infinite understanding and perfect knowledge reside in God. I don’t see a reason to view them as synonymous.
br.d
Please provide the specific verses which stipulate what “enables” what.
rhutchin
Let’s change what I said to, “Infinite understanding is part of the counsel of God’s will, and God’s works are known to God.
br.d
Thanks – I thought there would be no support for that last highly inventive statement.
So now please provide a verse that specifically states infinite understanding does not equate to perfect knowledge – such that perfect knowledge of [X] does not equate to infinite understanding of [X]
rhutchin says: “God’s works enable knowledge”.
Do you mean that God knows because He does, and He knows everything because He does everything?
Hi Carl,
I think you’ll find rh has evolving definitions and declarations for many things – presented AS-IF they represent essential Calvinism.
His current appeal to “infinite understanding” is new – and fairly recent.
If you keep your eye out for it – I think you’ll recognize such appeals as subtle strategies designed to smuggle in “mere” permission (in camouflaged form)
“Mere” permission facilitates exculpatory arguments – designed to help the THEOS escape being the AUTHOR of evil.
What is subtly inferred in the language – is “infinite understanding” of the creature’s nature – in the case of sins.
*AS-IF* the THEOS plays no causal role – but rather simply understands
The strategy is designed to escape the THEOS appearing as the CAUSE of sin and evil.
For example:
FBI Interrogator:
Mr. Smith – did you see your older brother Bill take the knife and kill his wife?
Mr. Smith:
I saw that my older brother Bill had infinite understanding that his wife was dead.
Hey BR.D
I loved your example of the FBI… because that is the game that is played over and over again. Without blushing…and pretending it makes great sense.
FBI Interrogator:
Mr. Smith – did you see your older brother Bill take the knife and kill his wife?
Mr. Smith:
I saw that my older brother Bill had infinite understanding that his wife was dead.
It is comical to watch…thanks BR.D
Yes – I agree – It sure is funny sometimes! :-]
GraceAddict writes, “Hey BR.D I loved your example of the FBI… because that is the game that is played over and over again. Without blushing…and pretending it makes great sense.”
I hate to be dense on this, but I don’t understand the FBI example. Since br.d cannot, or is unwilling, to explain it, can you help me out? What does the example mean? Who represents God, etc.?
Hi RH… I can tell you how I read it and it made immediate sense to me. This may not be what BR.D was saying but it is how I read it.
FBI Interrogator: Is BR.D or Me asking Mr. Smith a (Calvinist). About OLDER brother Bill (God)
Mr. Smith (Calvinist) – did you see your older brother Bill (God) take the knife and kill his wife?
Mr. Smith:( Calvinist )
I saw that my older brother Bill (God) had infinite understanding that his wife was dead.
My comments:
Bill not only understood his wife was dead but He killed his wife with a knife.
The Calvinist, Mr. Smith, is using language to hide the fact that his brother is the actual murderer.
That is why BR.D writes: (IMO)
“is designed to help the THEOS escape being the AUTHOR of evil.”
*AS-IF* the THEOS plays no causal role – but rather simply understands
The strategy is designed to escape the THEOS appearing as the CAUSE of sin and evil.”
Hope this is accurate and helps. This was how I read it.
Carl – I liked your post and that is very accurate as to what is taught in consistent Calvinism.
At it’s base what Calvinism teaches is meticulous divine determinism of ALL events and then tries to hide it with vague or misleading terminology.
br.d writes, “His current appeal to “infinite understanding” is new – and fairly recent.”
That is because people have problems with omniscience but ought to be able to understand Ephesians 1:11, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will,…” especially “…the counsel of His will,…” God’s infinite understanding is part of the counsel of God’s will with God’s will being the rationale for His works with God’s works being part of His omniscience. No one has argued against God having infinite understanding or His will being the source of His works.
Then, “If you keep your eye out for it – I think you’ll recognize such appeals as subtle strategies designed to smuggle in “mere” permission (in camouflaged form)”
If by “mere permission” you mean to override Ephesians 1:11, then there is no smuggling in of “mere” permission.” If you mean ““mere permission” as being concurrent with and subordinate to Ephesians 1:11, I don’t see your problem.
Then, “*AS-IF* the THEOS plays no causal role – but rather simply understands”
God never simply understands (if you mean that His understanding is irrelevant to his decision making), but incorporates His understanding into the counsel of His will by which He works all things.
Then, “For example:
FBI Interrogator:
Mr. Smith – did you see your older brother Bill take the knife and kill his wife?
Mr. Smith:
I saw that my older brother Bill had infinite understanding that his wife was dead.”
I can’t figure out the example. Who do these characters represent? What does infinite understanding have to do with a person killing his wife? God would have an infinite understanding of Bill and his desire to kill his wife so that God would use this understanding to decide whether Bill should be free to kill his wife.
br.d
His current appeal to “infinite understanding” is new – and fairly recent.
rhutchin
That is because people have problems with omniscience but ought to be able to understand Ephesians 1:11, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will,
br.d
That is hilarious rhutchin! :-]
One must come up with all sorts of new inventions to smuggle in “mere” permission because people have problems with divine omniscience. What a hoot!!
rhutchin
If by “mere permission” you mean to override Ephesians 1:11, then there is no smuggling in of “mere” permission.” If you mean ““mere permission” as being concurrent with and subordinate to Ephesians 1:11, I don’t see your problem.
br.d
Another good one rhutchin!
AS-IF I haven’t used the term “mere” permission a thousand times here! :-]
rhutchin
God never simply understands (if you mean that His understanding is irrelevant to his decision making), but incorporates His understanding into the counsel of His will by which He works all things.
br,d
For example:
FBI Interrogator:
Mr. Smith – did you see your older brother Bill take the knife and kill his wife?
Mr. Smith:
I saw that my older brother Bill had infinite understanding that his wife was dead.
rhutchin
I can’t figure out the example. Who do these characters represent? ……etc
br.d
I do find this humorous!
I have a suspicion you know very well what this model of language exemplifies from a personal perspective.
GraceAddict saw the connection immediately! :-]
rhutchin
That is because people have problems with omniscience but ought to be able to understand Ephesians 1:11, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will”…..etc
br.d
Dr. Johnathan Pritchett – Trinity Theological Seminary
-quote
I thank God we’ve got Romans 9, John 6, and Ephesians 1, because otherwise we might think Calvinism is correct! :-]
Happy New Year everybody!
May you be warmly blessed with his wonderful riches in Christ Jesus!
And a special thank you to Dr. Flowers – for his excellent ministry in the Lord!
My sincere thanks!
“Dr. Johnathan Pritchett – Trinity Theological Seminary-quote
I thank God we’ve got Romans 9, John 6, and Ephesians 1, because otherwise we might think Calvinism is correct! ”
LOL!!! In the image of br.d; bold claims; no substance.
rhutchin
LOL!!! In the image of br.d; bold claims; no substance.
br.d
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder :-]
Carl writes, “Do you mean that God knows because He does, and He knows everything because He does everything?”
Ephesians 1 tells us, “God works all things according to the counsel of His will.” God knows His works.
Calvinists are known for shifting into a “greased pig routine” when it comes to acknowledging Calvin’s god as the AUTHOR of sinful evil events.
Its pretty much fruitless to expect much more than that.
Justice, Mercy, Grace
JUSTICE
When you receive what you deserve.
“All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23)
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 6:23)
MERCY
When you don’t receive what you deserve.
But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us
alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved). (Ephesians 2:4-5)
GRACE
When you receive what you didn’t deserve.
“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should.
(Ephesians 2:8-9)
JUSTICE – MERCY – GRACE
“But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Luke 18:13)
The publican deserved JUSTICE.
He asked for MERCY.
He was justified by GRACE.
Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
God may get you mercy as a SINNER, but EARTHLY justice still happens, hence, theif on the cross.
The law of Moses did not grant mercy on the FLESH, but Jesus grants mercy on the SPIRIT.
FLESH (PERISH), BUT THE SPIRIT (did not perish).
Hence, those he PERISHED in the flood did NOT perish in the spirit.
PEOPLE ARE DYING….HOW DARE YOU! (A little Gretta Global Climate Change comedy for ya).
Ed
chapmaned24 to Aiden writes, ‘FLESH (PERISH), BUT THE SPIRIT (did not perish). Hence, those he PERISHED in the flood did NOT perish in the spirit.”
Genesis 6, says, “the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually…So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.”
Noah found grace, but nothing is said of grace for the ungodly destroyed in the flood.
In 2 Peter 2, “God…did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly…then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority….”
Doesn’t sound good for the ungodly from this. Even if their sin is not counted against them, the people are still ungodly 2 Peter 3 tells us, “the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”
rhutchin,
You sound like Aidan.
So, I will say that Jesus died for the UNGODLY…Jesus was just, they were unjust.
1 Peter 3:18-20 King James Version (KJV)
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
BEFORE YOU CAME TO GOD, YOU WERE JUST AS WICKED AS THEY WERE…we all were. So don’t think that you are SPECIAL, because you are not. Neither am I. We were JUST as wicked as they were.
But Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD…
1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “But Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD…
1 John 2:2 – And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.”
Yep. That still leaves the ungodly, ungodly. A sinner forgiven of his sin is still a sinner; it’s his nature. That’s why Jesus emphasized the inner thoughts of the person as condemning him. A sinner still needs a heart transplant if he is to enter heavne even if he were never to sin.
rhutchin
A sinner still needs a heart transplant if he is to enter heavne even if he were never to sin.
br.d
Or in Calvinism’s case – a different floppy drive with a different program – implanted in the forehead.
Metaphorically speaking that is :-]
Not according to the verses I provided. I don’t know what you are reading.
chapmaned24 writes, “Not according to the verses I provided. I don’t know what you are reading. ”
The verses you provided addressed Jesus death for sin. They did not address the nature of the person – absent sin, the person is still ungodly. Thus, the need to be born again. Are you saying that all people are born again?
rhutchin
The verses you provided addressed Jesus death for sin. They did not address the nature of the person – absent sin, the person is still ungodly. Thus, the need to be born again. Are you saying that all people are born again?
br.d
Well – in Calvinism there are in fact two layers of DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS on this issue.
1) On Universal Divine Causal Determinism – the vast majority of humans are specifically DESIGNED for eternal torment in a lake of fire – and a small few are DESIGNED otherwise. But in both cases everything they “need” is already accounted for by DESIGN.
It LOGICALLY follows – Man’s “need” was never a TRUE determining factor.
It currently serves its purpose as a red-herring for Calvinism.
Another example of Calvinism’s *AS-IF* thinking pattern.
In other words DOUBLE-MINDEDNESS.
2) Since in Calvinism it is the case that men have everything they “need” by DESIGN – then any hyperventilating on our part over “Total Depravity” or man’s need for salvation etc – are totally IRRATIONAL
Predicated on the IRRATIONAL notion that anything about man is UP TO man
When the TRUTH is – in Calvinism absolutely nothing is UP TO man.
Last I recall, I was discussing those who died in the flood, before the law…Romans 5:13, 4:15.
It does NOT matter NATURE. That’s irrelevant. I know Calvinists concentrate on “sin nature”. That’s not what I discuss… ever.
My discussion is on when sin is NOT CHARGED TO YOUR ACCOUNT, vs. when sin is charged against you.
You haven’t picked up on that yet.
No matter how evil they were, the law was not in effect (ROMANS 5:13), therefore sin nature has no bearing.
Once a person has KNOWLEDGE (Romans 3:20, 7:7-9), then whatever you sin is put on your account (IMPUTED).
WHEN the people in the flood drowned, they were indeed sinful, but ROMANS 5:13, 4:15, their sins were NOT IMPUTED (not charged against them).
But, just like Abraham, their place of abode after they died was with Abraham, and Adam, etc.
Abraham sinned, just like those in the flood. The law did not exist. Romans 5:13. No sin was IMPUTED to Abraham.
That does not mean that Abraham was sinless. It only means that he had no sin charged against him.
But, no one could be with God until Jesus died and paid the price for those UNCHARGED sins.
Now… Jesus died some 2000 years ago. For those who never heard of a Jesus…Romans 2:14-16.
Sin nature is not the subject that you want it to be.
Tree of KNOWLEDGE of good and evil is the subject.
Ignorance is bliss, so, as long as you have no clue as to who Jesus is… You are under Romans 2:14-16…judged by your SECRET thoughts.
But, again, Calvinists concentrate on sin, nature. I don’t. Why? Because no one has a sin nature until they get KNOWLEDGE of good and evil. That’s the spiritual death date… we are not born dead.
Have you ever asked yourself WHY the Jews were given the law of Moses, and YOU were not?
If you haven’t ever asked yourself that, DO IT NOW, and research the answer.
TULIP is only a flower.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “But, again, Calvinists concentrate on sin, nature. I don’t. Why? Because no one has a sin nature until they get KNOWLEDGE of good and evil. That’s the spiritual death date… we are not born dead. ”
In John 3, Jesus said, ““Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” A person must be born of the Spirit (born again) in order to enter the kingdom of God. Nicodemus understood what Jesus was saying when he asked, “How can a man be born when he is old?” One is not physically born, then die, and then be born again. One is born physically and then must be born again. Thus, the Psalm, “The wicked are estranged from the womb; They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.” Bildad correctly asked in Job, “How then can man be righteous before God? Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman? If even the moon does not shine, And the stars are not pure in His sight, How much less man, who is a maggot, And a son of man, who is a worm?” No one is born righteous, but all are born unrighteous (born spiritually dead) and cannot enter heaven until being born again of the Spirit.
rhutchin,
WELL, there ya go with JOHN again, as with your JOHN 6 routine.
He was speaking to JEWS, not Gentiles.
Let me explain this as if you were a 2 year old. Until you HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL, you are NOT DEAD “IN TRESPASSES AND SINS”…
Therefore, there is NO NEED to be BORN AGAIN, because you are STILL born of God (alive). God is WITH YOU …UNTIL…you get KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.
Once you DIE a spiritual death, THEN there is a need to be BORN AGAIN, hence the word “AGAIN” OF God.
So, you people define the word AGAIN, is the following:
1. Born of the FLESH
2. Born of God
Utilitizing the word AGAIN as if it is related to ONE WORD, “born”. But it is NOT. You are missing “of God”, and THEN you can use “BORN AGAIN OF GOD.
When you are born in the flesh, GOD IS WITH YOU, so there is no need to be BORN “AGAIN” OF GOD when God never left you to begin with.
This is ALL BASIC STUFF from the Garden of Eden. Eat of the TREE OF “KNOWLEDGE” OF GOOD AND EVIL, AND GOD LEAVES YOU. SIMPLE. Then God TEMPORARILY PROVIDED A SACRIFICE to COVER their SHAME (SINS).
Jesus is the FINAL sacrifice, NO NEED FOR ANY MORE ANIMAL SACRIFICES FOR SIN.
So, getting back to the beginning of this, THE JEWS KNEW GOOD AND EVIL, THEREFORE, THEY NEED TO BE “BORN AGAIN”.
Your average Gentile NEVER had knowledge of Good and Evil, UNTIL….INTRODUCTION TO…THE LAW, and the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, and if ya read the law, LEARN OF YOUR SINS, then you die that spiritual death, then a need to be born again happens.
Babies…God never left them, for they never died a spiritual death because they had NO KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL, and THEREFORE, they are NOT LOST to begin with.
I wish you would read THE WHOLE STORY instead of picking a verse here and there, because your Cavlinisms is like…THE TWILIGHT ZONE.
Regarding the WICKED ARE ESTRANGED FROM THE WOMB, THAT IS DIRECTED TO THE JEWS WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW THAT DISOBEY THE LAW, not discussing CHILDREN, NOT DISCUSSING YOUR EVERYDAY AVERAGE GENTILES. Besides, it states that the WICKED are estranged from the womb, NOT THE RIGHTEOUS…Abraham was righteous…was he ESTRANGED from the womb? You make it sound as if EVERYONE is wicked, but apparently, Abraham was RIGHTEOUS, ABEL WAS RIGHTEOUS, NOAH WAS RIGHTEOUS…
And if those people were righteous, THEN HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT “BILDAD CORRECTLY ASKED….
How can a man be righteous before God…THE BIBLE ANSWERS THAT SPECIFICALLY, AND THE ANSWER…My goodness, rhutich, why didn’t Bildad just ask NOAH, or Abel, or Abraham?
But…ROMANS 3:21 ANSWERS THE QUESTION…
without the laws of do’s and don’ts…WITHOUT THE LAW…IGNORANCE OF SIN, FREE SPIRITED, NAKED WITHOUT A CARE IN THE WORLD…you do wear clothes, I presume? Why? Adam and Eve were naked, and God put them there that way, RIGHT? But, just like WOMEN DO…they want to go shopping…FOR CLOTHES. Why? To “COVER UP THEIR NAKEDNESS”? WHY?
I’ll tell ya what…let’s get naked, for that is NOT A SIN, RIGHT? Is it a sin, or isn’t it a sin? YOU TELL ME. If God put Adam and Eve in the Garden NAKED, and it was GOOD, as you would say, THEN LET’S GET NAKED, since it’s NOT A SIN, huh?
NAKED…not even knowing that there is anything wrong with that, IGNORANCE, just like Adam and Eve. THAT is righteousness before the Lord. David danced NAKED BEFORE THE LORD. Come on, rhutchin, do your NAKED DANCE.
But, RIGHTEOUSNESS under the law is OBEDIENCE to the law…that is, ONCE YA KNOW IT. Once you KNOW IT, then you LIVE IN IT, disobeying it, and THAT is when a SIN NATURE is BORN. SIN is BORN, and THAT is when you become WICKED, at the BIRTH OF SIN, NOT OF YOU.
You have yet to separate the JEW FROM THE GENTILE…you have yet to learn that GENTILES who know NOT the KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL do NOT fall under the same category of RIGHTEOUSNESS as everyone else does.
Make a TITLE called RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Then make 2 COLUMS…title one column, UNDER THE LAW. Title the other column WITHOUT THE LAW.
Romans 3:21
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Romans 7:8
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
Romans 7:9
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE ABOVE 3 VERSES WHERE IT STATES “WITHOUT THE LAW”. Pay particular attention to the words DEAD AND ALIVE.
And yet, it NEVER crosses your mind to FIND OUT WHY ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND JACOB never had the law of MOSES?
How was ISAAC “BORN AGAIN”? NO LAW, NO KNOWLEDGE OF SIN, SO, PLEASE TELL ME HOW ISAAC COULD POSSIBLE REPENT OF SOMETHING HE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT, LET ALONE BE “BORN AGAIN”? He didn’t have Jesus right there informing him to be BORN AGAIN. So, how was he BORN AGAIN?
My CONCLUSION…you are a YES MAN…you do not question, you follow orders. Another episode of YOUR TWILIGHT ZONE.
Ed Chapman
chapmaned24 writes, “WELL, there ya go with JOHN again, as with your JOHN 6 routine. He was speaking to JEWS, not Gentiles.”
In John 3, Jesus was speaking to a Jew with words applicable to gentiles. thus, we read, “God so loved the world…” God loved both Jews and gentiles and gave His son so that those Jews and gentiles who believed would have eternal life. In John 6, Jesus speaks of both Jews and gentiles when He said, “No one can come to me.”
We, obviously, disagree on the rest of your comment.
But, WHY do we disagree? You’ll need to explain.
Acts 17:30, first half… what does that mean to you?
Isn’t the word, “ignorance” there?
I asked a specific question regarding the sins of Isaac, and how he was born again… But your answer is, “obviously, we disagree…”
How do we disagree on a question?
Your “NO ONE CAN COME TO ME” IS RELATED TO…
Galatians 3:24
Wherefore the law was our SCHOOLMASTER to bring us to Christ…
So, you don’t believe Romans 5:13, 4:15 is authentic verses?
Were they inserted there by pagans?
Ed Chapman
What does Romans 7:7-9 and Romans 3:21 and Romans 5:13, and Romans 4:15, and Acts 17:30 all mean to you?
Why was the Jews given the law of Moses, and Gentiles (including you) not?
Why was Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob without the law of Moses?
How are those questions related to, “We, obviously, disagree…”
Disagree on what? Explain, please.
Ed Chapman
Let’s try this, rhutchin…
Police: Mr. Smith, did you see your brother kill his wife?
Mr. Smith: I don’t really “see” things, I have infinite knowledge, so I know my brother killed his wife.
Police: OOOkay. If you weren’t there, how do you know your brother killed his wife?
Mr. Smith: Well, I planned it and made sure it would happen! I have infinite knowledge!
Police: Wait. What? You PLANNED it?
Mr. Smith: Well, yes. I plan EVERYTHING.
Police: I’ll play along. If you weren’t there, how did you make sure your brother carried out your plan and killed his wife?
Mr. Smith: Easy, for someone with infinite knowledge. I made sure that my brother wanted to kill his wife by not changing his nature, and by arranging all the circumstances so that he would have the perfect opportunity to kill his wife and had a gun handy. I planned it to happen to the last millisecond. Perfect! Glorious!
Police: Okay, Mr. Smith, you are under arrest for murder.
Mr. Smith: What? You can’t do this! I used “secondary means”. I have no responsibility for this! This is all on my brother!
Police: Would this have happened without your direct involvement?
Mr. Smith: Well, EVERYTHING happens because of my direct involvement. I have infinite knowledge. I arranged for my brother’s wife’s murder for my own GLORY! But I do all this in such a way as to ensure that I have no responsibility for my brother’s “free” choices.
Police: So your brother could have not murdered his wife?
Mr. Smith: No. He had to because I control everything and I decided he would before he was even born. But he made a free choice to kill his wife. He wanted to. So what if he only had one “choice” he could make.
Police: Okay. Your are under arrest.
Mr. Smith: You just don’t understand Calvinism.
Well done. The Calvinist appears to believe that since their Calvi-god answers to no one, he can act as unjust or unloving as he wishes, since he cannot be called out. In truth, every knee will bow in acknowledgement of God’s perfection in goodness, mercy, justice and truth, not merely a reluctant, fearful ‘It must be okay if you do it, fearsome, arbitrary and narcissistic Calvi-god’.
There is no injustice, treachery or unlovingness about God. He does not manipulate people (through deceptive layers of ‘means’) to do evil, then pounce on them in retribution for ‘their’ wickedness. It is Calvinists who will one day hang their heads in shame for the hideous accusations they have made against a good and righteous God.
Good one Carl!
The “You just don’t understand Calvinism” argument reminds me of Jame’s Whites statement
-quote
“Calvinism is a FULLY-ORBED theology”.
This is of course another example of Calvinism’s INSIDER LANGUAGE.
FULLY ORBED in this case – represents the ability to point 10 fingers in 20 directions at the same time! :-]
Carl writes, “Let’s try this, rhutchin…
Police: Mr. Smith, did you see your brother kill his wife?”
I’ll assume that we both agree that God is omnipresent and omnipotent. Thus, the conversation would go something like this:
Police: Mr. Smith, did you see your brother kill his wife?
Mr. Smith: I was present when he killed her; I saw him kill his wife. I know my brother killed his wife.
Police: If you were there, did you try to stop him?
Mr. Smith: No, I planned these events according to the counsel of my will; I had already decided that I would not stop him even though I could have done so.
Police: Wait. What? You PLANNED it?
Mr. Smith: Well, yes. I plan EVERYTHING.
Police: I’ll play along. since you were there, how did you make sure your brother carried out your plan and killed his wife?
Mr. Smith: Easy, for someone with infinite knowledge. I understand my brother and understood that he would desire to kill his wife. I knew when and where he would do it He didn’t have to tell me anything.
I could have changed his desire to kill his wife or I could have physically stopped him either directly or through other people. By not changing his nature, and by arranging all the circumstances so that he would have the perfect opportunity to kill his wife and have a gun handy. I planned it to happen to the last millisecond. Perfect! Glorious!
Police: Okay, Mr. Smith, you are under arrest for murder.
Mr. Smith: What? You can’t arrest me for not intervening to stop my brother.
Police: Would this have happened without your direct involvement?
Mr. Smith: Yes. My brother’s desire was to kill his wife.EVERYTHING happens because I am able to control events by direct action or no action.. I have infinite knowledge of everything that will happen. I ordained my brother’s wife’s murder for my own GLORY! I do all this in such a way as to ensure that my brother acts according to his desires leaving me only to decide whether to stop him. I chose not to stop him and made that decision long ago.
Police: So your brother could have not murdered his wife?
Mr. Smith: No. He had to because he desired to do so and could not overcome his desires without my help. I decided I would not help him ensuring that he would kill his wife and made this decision before he was even born. My brother was independent of me and self-determining. He made a free choice to kill his wife consistent with his desires. He wanted to. So what if his desires meant that he only had one “choice” he could make.
Police: Okay. Your are under arrest.
Mr. Smith: For what? Understanding why people do the things they do and not stopping them?
Well, a happy new year to everyone from the Irish side of the pond.
Continuing…
Police: Okay. You are under arrest.
Mr. Smith: For what? Understanding why people do the things they do and not stopping them?
Police: No, for planning,orchestrating and making certain your brother’s murder of his wife. All of which you just confessed to.
Carl writes, “Police: No, for planning,orchestrating and making certain your brother’s murder of his wife. All of which you just confessed to.”
Mr. Smith: How did I make certain my brother murdered his wife when I only stood by and did nothing and let him do that which he wanted to do?
br.d
Like I said – the Calvinist’s strategy for evading the “Author of evil” problem is to slide into “greased pig” mode.
Whether one wants to waste any time chasing after a happy little “greased pig” is really just a matter of personal preference. :-]
br.d writes, “…the Calvinist’s strategy for evading the “Author of evil” problem is to slide into “greased pig” mode.”
We are just trying to get the analogy correct. Wouldn’t you agree that Mr. Smith was mischaracterized as the “brother,” when he should be the “father” who witnessed his son murdering his wife and did nothing to stop him even though he had the ability to do so and understood before his son was born that he would set out to murder his wife?
br.d
The Calvinist’s strategy for evading the “Author of evil” problem is to slide into “greased pig” mode.”
rhutchin
We are just trying to get the analogy correct…etc
br.d
I hardly think anyone is going to be fooled by ruse! :-]
We already know Carl and GraceAddict understand the analogy.
Carl is just interested in seeing the extent of the “greased pig” routine for himself :-]
Chasing….. Chasing…
“Police: No, for planning,orchestrating and making certain your brother’s murder of his wife. All of which you just confessed to.”
Mr. Smith: How did I make certain my brother murdered his wife when I only stood by and did nothing and let him do that which he wanted to do?
Police: As you admitted, you planned it down to the millisecond. You arranged everything so that your brother only had one “free choice”; to murder his wife. Furthermore, you ensured that your brother wanted to kill his wife by planning him to have a nature such that he wanted to murder his wife. Nice try, playing the “I didn’t do anything, it’s all on him” card. Come with me.
Carl writes, “Furthermore, you ensured that your brother wanted to kill his wife by planning him to have a nature such that he wanted to murder his wife. Nice try, playing the “I didn’t do anything, it’s all on him” card. ”
So, Mr. Smith turns out to be the father and not the brother. However, God did determine the nature of each person by denying them faith until they heard the gospel.
rhutchin writes: “However, God did determine the nature of each person by denying them faith until they heard the gospel.”
But, rhutchin, that isn’t your whole story, is it? You see, in your view, not everyone who hears the gospel is given faith, are they?
And God didn’t just determine your nature by denying or giving faith. He planned that mankind would have a bad nature all along, because He plans, determines, and makes certain, well, everything.
So. Simple logic. The being who determines and plans everything is also responsible for everything. How could that not be true?
Calvinism: 1001 ways to speak truths while hiding the WHOLE truth
The part they tell you:
The doctor determined the nature of the patients death by denying the patient the antidote for the poison.
The part they don’t tell you
The doctor injected the poison into patient before he denied the antidote. :-]
Because he hides behind the curtain of secondary means, which is supposed to deceive us into being tricked by the smoke and noise. Sorry, we have seen the man behind the curtain. But it doesn’t matter, because it is all a false, man-made gospel anyway.
This string of short posts refuting RH is just brilliant. Carl -BR.D and TS00.
I copied and pasted these short replies you guys gave because it hit so many of the tactics Calvinists use and exposes the nature of the being that is their god. Thanks gents short and to the point knocked it out of the park.
This describes James ‘Dr’ White perfectly. Need a great example of this…controlling, manipulating, patronising, dismissive, condescending, crushing, dismissive…
Hello Thaddeus and welcome