Calvinists, how do you interprete this verse.

"All" is not comprehensive. In fact it's not all that comprehensive in English, as you can point out all sorts of examples where all isn't always comprehensive.

Y'know where it's intended to be comprehensive? In science textbooks. In philosophy textbooks.

Is 1 Timothy either one of these?

Most people focus directly on 1 Tim 2:4, without noticing there are all sorts of uses of "all" in the immediate context. "First of all" -- should that mean we should be doing what Paul commands here, above doing anything else with our lives, comprehensively? It can't be.

Then Paul wants prayers and intercessions for everyone. Uh, is that each individual without exception? Or is that group also not quite comprehensive? In this case Paul is being general -- that no one is to be an exception because they're low or high class, or live in one area or another of the world (which probably intends ethnicity).

And how about "all goodness and holiness"? Is that the direction? That if we don't live out every goodness and holiness, then the intent of our prayers aren't answered? Again, this is general, and not comprehensive. It's wide-ranging. It's not each and every goodness or holiness.

So too, verses 4 & 5. The "all" here is wide-ranging, it spans every class and ethnicity. But it is not comprehensive. It doesn't intend to deal with each person individually.

And that's how "all men" is used in Greek, too. It's used generally of the entire race of mankind. But it doesn't mean to function individually toward each person.

pastorkevin73 said:

I have always been curious about the Calvinist interpretation of 1 Tim 2:4. I have included a few verses before and after to help give some context.



Calvinists how do you interpret verse 4?

Click to expand...

Calvinists must ignore certain words in scripture, ie.:

ALL, ALL MEN, EVERY MAN, THE WORLD, ALL THE WORLD, etc.

If you can choose to ignore certain words or phrases, you can create your own dogma.

It is valid that when "all" is used, the idea is "all of something" and not all of everything. However Calvinism picks and chooses, saying it means all of something here and all of everything there, rather than all of something, in all cases where all is used. So when the text says God is all knowing, that means all of everything because that matches Calvinist doctrine, but when desires all men to be saved, that means all kinds of men.

Calvinism is clearly a doctrine created by men and poured into scripture by rewriting the text, inferring whatever matches Calvinism. Jesus draws all kinds of men. Jesus is the propitiation for the whole part of the world God chose before creation. And on and on. God did not love the world meaning all mankind, but that part of the world that was supposedly elected beforehand. Whatever fits the doctrine is what they go with, even though intellectually they know their lack of adherence to a consistent meaning for words marks them just as it marks the translators of the NWT.

So we have God desires all men to be saved, but Calvinism says it does not mean "all of the something in view, men." No, here we rewrite the text and say all kinds of men, changing the verse to God desires some men to be saved. Verse after verse is turned on its head.

heymikey80 said:

"All" is not comprehensive. In fact it's not all that comprehensive in English, as you can point out all sorts of examples where all isn't always comprehensive.

Y'know where it's intended to be comprehensive? In science textbooks. In philosophy textbooks.

Is 1 Timothy either one of these?

Most people focus directly on 1 Tim 2:4, without noticing there are all sorts of uses of "all" in the immediate context. "First of all" -- should that mean we should be doing what Paul commands here, above doing anything else with our lives, comprehensively? It can't be.

Click to expand...

This much is correct in that context matters. If I'm speaking of my family, and I say "everyone is in the car", then "everyone" is all inclusive of that context, namely my family.

Then Paul wants prayers and intercessions for everyone. Uh, is that each individual without exception? Or is that group also not quite comprehensive? In this case Paul is being general -- that no one is to be an exception because they're low or high class, or live in one area or another of the world (which probably intends ethnicity).

Click to expand...

Actually, what Paul means is that we should not exclude anyone from prayers and intercessions. Thus, "all" means "all".

[quoteAnd how about "all goodness and holiness"? Is that the direction? That if we don't live out every goodness and holiness, then the intent of our prayers aren't answered? Again, this is general, and not comprehensive. It's wide-ranging. It's not each and every goodness or holiness.[/quote]

That's not what that text says.

So too, verses 4 & 5. The "all" here is wide-ranging, it spans every class and ethnicity. But it is not comprehensive. It doesn't intend to deal with each person individually.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but the context doesn't bear that out. There is no class or ethnicity in this context. "All", here, means "ALL." Every person.

The problem you have is that you want to use other instances where context suggests all of a particular group, and transfer it here, even though there is nothing in this context that allows it.

And that's how "all men" is used in Greek, too. It's used generally of the entire race of mankind. But it doesn't mean to function individually toward each person.

Click to expand...

This is fundamentally incorrect. "All men" without a limiting context means "all men" just as it would in English. 1 Tim 2:4 doesn't have a limiting context, thus, here, "all" means "all".

Muz

heymikey80 said:

"All" is not comprehensive. In fact it's not all that comprehensive in English, as you can point out all sorts of examples where all isn't always comprehensive.

Click to expand...

Romans 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

-A

pastorkevin73 said:

I have always been curious about the Calvinist interpretation of 1 Tim 2:4. I have included a few verses before and after to help give some context.



Calvinists how do you interpret verse 4?

Click to expand...

All types or classes of men, of the elect..

armothe said:

Romans 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Click to expand...

First, I didn't say it never means "comprehensively". It certainly doesn't mean "comprehensively" in every case though. There're three examples surrounding 2:4 to show that.

But I also disagree that it means "comprehensively" here:
"All have sinned and are justified." Is that each and every person, comprehensively in your view?

I've pointed out why I would think the word doesn't mean "comprehensively everyone": because it doesn't mean that in every other case surrounding 2:4.

Rightglory,

"All have sinned and are justified." Is that each and every person, comprehensively in your view?

Click to expand...

Uneqivocally every single human being that ever lived. There are none that escaped the death sentence through Adam, and none escaped the life of Christ. If Christ lost even one, then Satan still rules this world through the power of death. Christ's death and resurrection would be meaningless.
I Cor 15:14-22.
In reference to the Work of Christ, the "all" has always been "all without exception".

pastorkevin73 said:

I have always been curious about the Calvinist interpretation of 1 Tim 2:4. I have included a few verses before and after to help give some context.



Calvinists how do you interpret verse 4?

Click to expand...

I can answer that and i am 100% Arminian. They say all doesn't mean all it mean all types, all races, statuses, nations ect. But what they do not realize that verse 6 goes on to say that Jesus died for all men, but of course they will claim all men doesn't really mean all men some how it only means the elect.

chestertonrules said:

Calvinists must ignore certain words in scripture, ie.:

ALL, ALL MEN, EVERY MAN, THE WORLD, ALL THE WORLD, etc.

If you can choose to ignore certain words or phrases, you can create your own dogma.

Click to expand...

Exactly

1Cr 15:21For since by man [came] death, by man [came] also the resurrection of the dead.


1Cr 15:22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.


Will only some die and some be resurrected?

pastorkevin73 said:

I have always been curious about the Calvinist interpretation of 1 Tim 2:4. I have included a few verses before and after to help give some context.



Calvinists how do you interpret verse 4?

Click to expand...

I interpret it that the Lord desires all of his creation to want to know and choose Him, and really, who doesn't desire that of their own creations? The reality is, though, that because we are all fallen, we won't choose of our own free will to know or choose Him.

chestertonrules said:

Calvinists must ignore certain words in scripture, ie.:

ALL, ALL MEN, EVERY MAN, THE WORLD, ALL THE WORLD, etc.

If you can choose to ignore certain words or phrases, you can create your own dogma.

Click to expand...

No, we don't ignore any words or phrases. We do, however, respond to the context.

armothe said:

Romans 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

-A

Click to expand...

Nobody has said that it never means all, only that it doesn't always mean all, and you need to look at the context to understand which is which.

pastorkevin73 said:

As I have studied this passage I have to say that I am in agreement with those here who oppose your viewpoint.

Click to expand...

On what basis do you require this to be a comprehensive list? That is, if you've made an agreement, you've reached a conclusion: is the conclusion concluded based on something in particular in the passage?

pastorkevin73 said:

I however, have another question for you. Since some of you Calvinists have stated that all refers to the elect how do you come to this conclusion when elect is not mentioned in this passage?

Click to expand...

While I don't hold this view, have you noticed the rest of this chapter? Where does it say anyone has been saved in the rest of this chapter? Is this a reference to those within the church, or to everyone everywhere? That is, which is the context: people in the church, or every person everywhere?

pastorkevin73 said:

On the contrary we will choose to either accept Him or not. I choose at a young the confess my sins and ask for Jesus to forgive my sins. I choose to follow Him with all my heart, soul, mind and strength. In my youth I turned away from that. Then later in my youth I turned back to Him again. I again, confessed my sins to Him, asked for forgiveness and since then have dedicated my life to submitting to Him and loving Him with all my heart, soul, mind and strength. There is a choice.

Click to expand...

You only think that you made the first step when in reality God was already there, changing your heart.

armothe said:

Originally Posted by armothe Romans 3:23 - for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Click to expand...

A New Dawn said:

Nobody has said that it never means all, only that it doesn't always mean all, and you need to look at the context to understand which is which.

Click to expand...

Well, Jesus the Christ was a human being, and He didn't sin, so I'd say in this case 'all' doesn't mean 'all'.

-A