Free Will or Predestination

[twin1954]

I don't think that predestination by itself as most see it; is the gospel preached from scriptures, I say this with two set of scriptures concerning salvation:

Titus 2:14
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
KJV
now take note Please that paul preached that Jesus gave Himself for us, that He MIGHT, redeem us this is talking about the same group of people "US" He died for US that He MIGHT redeem us, might means He may redeem US or it can also mean that HE may not redeem us

Jesus Gave Himself for Us, Jesus Died for us,
1. that He might or might not save us.
2. that He has saved us, we being the elect

which one fits best what paul intended to say you make the call?

clearly paul say that Jesus died for some that may be saved which also means that some may not be saved, sorta puts a hole in the limited atonement to me! ok maybe paul was wrong here. look at one more

John 3:17
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
KJV
ok now I know calvinist claims that world in John 3:16 means only the world of the elect. But It don't! we can see this in john 3:17. look carefully see it yourself please. God sent His son not to condemn the elect (world) but that the World (elected) MIGHT BE saved. so if world in JOHN 3:16 means that Jesus only died for the world of the elect then "MIGHT' implies that the elect could be saved or it can also means that the elect could not be saved, this is red letters in My KJB meaning this is coming straight From the MOUTH of God himself, No No!! Jesus Died for the Whole world in john 3:16 that some might be saved, and limited atonement is a false teaching, I have shown you from scriptures which world God meant in John 3:16 the whole world, all sinners, that some might be saved, not all.
also in 1 John 2 it says that Jesus came not only for our( the saved) sins but for the sins of the whole world.

here is one more set that talks about the brethren, and that Jesus gave himself for their sins that they might be delivered from their sins, well according to calvinist there is no might to it. If Jesus gave himself for you then you will be saved, it contradicts what Jesus even said why He died that some might be saved.


Galatians 1:2-9
2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:
3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
KJV
seeing that God also says that He will preserve His word, and John calvin lived from 10 July 1509 to 27 May 1564, and he being credited with the doctrine of grace, then we would have been around 1500 years without the true gospel according to calvinist, this also would say that for 1500 years we were without the true word of God or Gospel of Grace, but to me it would not be the true doctrine of Grace, but another gospel that the Bible warned us about, if anyone comes with another gospel let him be accursed. so I say God said I have set before you life or death, so choose life and live. sounds Like the Sovereign God wanted us to choose life and by the foreknowledge of that decision He elected so I would say as the Bible says both: free-will and predestination is the true gospel

Please don't take over another thread with your nonsense. We all already know that you have an agenda and that you haven't a clue to what you are talking about. Repeating the same montra in every thread doesn't help your cause. You have actually become boring.

 

[DeaconDean]

Please don't take over another thread with your nonsense. We all already know that you have an agenda and that you haven't a clue to what you are talking about. Repeating the same montra in every thread doesn't help your cause. You have actually become boring.

I agree 100% with your accessment brother.

They have been given the correct definition from a reliable source, and still I have been accused of changing the meaning because that is what Calvinists do.

To continue arguing would be to pound one's head against the wall. It does no good and all it really does is you one terrific head-ache.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Hupomone10]

According to the rules of Greek grammar, faith by itself is not the gift referred to by Paul, but rather, the collective phrase is the gift.

"By grace are you saved through faith, and this is not your doing, but the gift of God, so that no man can boast" (Eph 2:8-9)

Everything I bolded/underlined is the "gift of God" that Paul is speaking about.

His point is, the entire reality of being in God's family is all of God's doing, is the gift of God, not our own doing, so that we cannot take credit for our salvation.

So while faith by itself is not the gift, it is part of the entire process that is a gift. That makes faith a gift, in a sense, along with salvation and grace (the other two nouns that serve as antecedents of the pronoun "this")

Although I disagree with the part about the whole phrase being the gift, I do understand your logic in it, and I can identify with the rest of your response. Thanks for acknowledging this.

Twin1954:

Rob, the elect recieve the gift of faith and grace in 2 ways: like a glass receives water which is passively and actively such as when we take that water and make it ours by drinking it. The water must first be received passively then because we are thirsty we drink it and make it ours. God's gift in no way means that He drinks for us. We drink but it is only because He has made us thirsty. He pours in grace and we receive it without doing anything and then because we have received it we take it for ourselves.

I like your analogy.

Blessings to all,
H.

 

[Hupomone10]

Well, im exausted and cannot do this anymore. It saddens me think that most likely I will never fully understand the sovereinty of God and the human responsiblity to respond. Im glad some of you can put this to rest so easily and I must admit im some what jealous that it has not been revealed to me but has been revealed to others.

Im also quite frustrated that in the midst of all of my crying out to God over and over again for salvation that I cant seem to find him, I pray and nothing happens, I feel dead inside and prayers seem to bounce off the ceiling for me and hit the floor, its useless in my case and I can only come to one of two conclusion's and its either because I truly have blasphemed the Holy Spirit or im simply not one of the elect.

So with that said I will back out of this thread as I do not wish to derail it.

Rob,

It should be clear by this point in this thread that no one understands this seeming contradiction, the way God's sovereignty and man's responsibility to choose work together. There are some who think they do, just like there are some who think they understand why the atom holds together.

In larger nuclei, the repulsion force of protons-to-protons far exceeds the attraction between the protons-electrons and protons-neutrons, and the atom should fly apart but they don't. There is a greater force that binds them together than the repulsion force. Scientists don't know why, so they create a term called "the nuclear force." Christians in the scientific community sometimes refer to this as "the Colossian force"

Col. 1:17
"in Him all things hold together."

Hang in there Rob, and

Prov. 3:5-6
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And do not lean on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight.

 

[Hupomone10]

Titus 2:14
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
KJV
now take note Please that paul preached that Jesus gave Himself for us, that He MIGHT, redeem us this is talking about the same group of people "US" He died for US that He MIGHT redeem us, might means He may redeem US or it can also mean that HE may not redeem us

Jesus Gave Himself for Us, Jesus Died for us,
1. that He might or might not save us.
2. that He has saved us, we being the elect

which one fits best what paul intended to say you make the call?

Greetings, brother. First, I will ask you since you have been accused of having an agenda, do you have an agenda, or are you just here to discuss the topic of free will or predestination? And if you have an agenda, what is it if you don't mind my asking?

Second, as a pastor (didn't you say you were one?) I would think you would check this with study tools (concordance, other translations, especially compare the Greek NT, Greek Word dictionary, etc) before jumping out there.

If you do so, you will see that there is no word in Greek in that verse (Titus 2:14) which translates into "might." The more literal translation in the venacular we use today would be

"who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed" (NASB)
The reason is because it is merely the Greek word for "to redeem", the act of redeeming. There is no "might" or "maybe" in it, nor is it intended. The same Greek phrase is in Luke 24:21:
"But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel."

Do you really think this should be translated "but we were hoping that it was He who was going to maybe redeem Israel" ?

When you read the KJV of this verse:
"But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel"
it is clear that it really means in today's English "to redeem", for it is the all-inclusive term "Israel" used, not an individual. Jesus accomplished redemption, it is not that He should have, He really did accomplish it for whoever believes. The "maybe" and "should have" and "might" applies only to the individual, not to humanity or even to Israel as a group, wouldn't you agree? Then the meaning of the Titus passage must be the same as the Luke passage, and that is "to redeem."

Given this, the possibilities, according to your suggestion, would be
Jesus died for humanity
1) to redeem humanity, or
2) to maybe redeem humanity.

You make the call, brother.

The rest of it I didn't study and you may be 100% correct. Just simply pointing out this first point. It doesn't mean what you said.

seeing that God also says that He will preserve His word, and John calvin lived from 10 July 1509 to 27 May 1564, and he being credited with the doctrine of grace, then we would have been around 1500 years without the true gospel according to calvinist, this also would say that for 1500 years we were without the true word of God or Gospel of Grace, but to me it would not be the true doctrine of Grace, but another gospel that the Bible warned us about, if anyone comes with another gospel let him be accursed.

I hate to change the subject, and if you've followed my posts at all you know that i am not a hyper-Calvinist or even a 5-point Calvinist, but I'm using this example to speak to the reasonableness of your argument:

The practice of speaking in tongues and ecstatic experiences attributed to the Holy Spirit in the Charismatic or pentecostal communities, and especially the practice of sharing something and telling people you were given "a word of knowledge" that was somehow supernaturally plopped down on you to share as "thus sayeth the Lord", can only be traced back to the Azuza Street revival (1900), or at the most back to Edward Irving (early 1800's).

So, in keeping with what you said about God preserving His Word regarding grace, should we say that for about 1800 years we were without the true doctrine of the Holy Spirit, speaking gibberish, and manifestations of the Holy Spirit such as falling backwards onto the ground and barking like dogs and laughing uncontrollably? And, as you said, to me this would not be the true doctrine of the Holy Spirit but another doctrine.

What do you think? Do you see the correlation? If Calvin teaching grace or Luther teaching salvation by faith cannot be true because this means God didn't preserve His Word for 1500 years, then neither can the Charismatic ecstatic experiences be considered authentic for the same reason. God didn't preserve this for 1800+ years.

If you are willing to concede the latter, I will revisit the former.

In Christ,
H.

 

[His_disciple3]

Greetings, brother. First, I will ask you since you have been accused of having an agenda, do you have an agenda, or are you just here to discuss the topic of free will or predestination? And if you have an agenda, what is it if you don't mind my asking?

Second, as a pastor (didn't you say you were one?) I would think you would check this with study tools (concordance, other translations, especially compare the Greek NT, Greek Word dictionary, etc) before jumping out there.

If you do so, you will see that there is no word in Greek in that verse (Titus 2:14) which translates into "might." The more literal translation in the venacular we use today would be

"who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed" (NASB)
The reason is because it is merely the Greek word for "to redeem", the act of redeeming. There is no "might" or "maybe" in it, nor is it intended. The same Greek phrase is in Luke 24:21:
"But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel."

, I am sorta of simply minded, you know when The Bible says that Jesus Died for the whole world's sin in 1 John 2, I try to preach the bible for what it says, I was always told that if someone said that the Word don't mean what it says that that would be false teachings, we can't take two or three times that predestination in mentioned in scripture and completely ignore all other scriptures and make a true doctrine, man does not live by bread alone but by every word( see I did it again thinking that every means every), also i only turn to my greek or hebrew strong concordance, when i don't understand it in english or someone questions a scripture, I speak english, does that make anyless that someone who speaks three languages, only in man's eyes not in The eyes Of God! God didn't say that everyone would have to understand greek and or hebrew in order to understand His Word, actually He promosied that His Word would be published in every nation( I did it again assumed every means every) the whole/every Word of God, Paul says that the elect needs salvation, pauls says that Jesus died for Us that us might be redeemed , Jesus says in John 3 :17 that He came that some might be saved. he died for the world that some might be saved, if calvinist is right about limited atonement then that verse would read that he came for the world and that the world would be saved, if he only came for the world of the elect then that world in John 3:17 would be saved not might be saved, as far as my part I will skip the most part of your post and say this: God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always walk in the Spirit or always be filled with the Spirit, the Bible shows that the Spirit was poured out on the disciples more than once, comparing the promises concerning the Word of God and the promises concerning His Holy Spirit, I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows your ignorance concerning the Holy Spirit and His power, my only agenda is to Keep God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirt be lifted up, to preach the truth, defend the truth and help as many as I can to come to the knowledge of Chirst and Him crucified, and let them know that God commended His love toward them while they were yet sinners, and "ALL" I and I do mean "ALL" that will believe shall be saved, Jesus Said If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me, "ALL" means ALL, all through one man Adam have fallen and the same amount ALL through faith can be saved. all through adam can't mean all and all through Christ be redeem not mean all! brother think not more highly of yourself than you ought to for God hath given every man a measure of Faith, ( there i go again assuming every means every. and as I have said before calvinist accuses me of limiting words to one definiton, but to them ELECT only has one defintion, and that is how they misunderstand scriptures, the Jews where the elect/chosen. the Bible speaks of elect angels, is only one Lady going to be in Heaven for the Bible speaks of THE ELECT LADY!! I will not recant nothing my friend I am giving scriptures as they say and not twisting them to fit my doctrine

 

[Hammster]

, I am sorta of simply minded, you know when The Bible says that Jesus Died for the whole world's sin in 1 John 2, I try to preach the bible for what it says, I was always told that if someone said that the Word don't mean what it says that that would be false teachings, we can't take two or three times that predestination in mentioned in scripture and completely ignore all other scriptures and make a true doctrine, man does not live by bread alone but by every word( see I did it again thinking that every means every), also i only turn to my greek or hebrew strong concordance, when i don't understand it in english or someone questions a scripture, I speak english, does that make anyless that someone who speaks three languages, only in man's eyes not in The eyes Of God! God didn't say that everyone would have to understand greek and or hebrew in order to understand His Word, actually He promosied that His Word would be published in every nation( I did it again assumed every means every) the whole/every Word of God, Paul says that the elect needs salvation, pauls says that Jesus died for Us that us might be redeemed , Jesus says in John 3 :17 that He came that some might be saved. he died for the world that some might be saved, if calvinist is right about limited atonement then that verse would read that he came for the world and that the world would be saved, if he only came for the world of the elect then that world in John 3:17 would be saved not might be saved, as far as my part I will skip the most part of your post and say this: God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always walk in the Spirit or always be filled with the Spirit, the Bible shows that the Spirit was poured out on the disciples more than once, comparing the promises concerning the Word of God and the promises concerning His Holy Spirit, I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows your ignorance concerning the Holy Spirit and His power, my only agenda is to Keep God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirt be lifted up, to preach the truth, defend the truth and help as many as I can to come to the knowledge of Chirst and Him crucified, and let them know that God commended His love toward them while they were yet sinners, and "ALL" I and I do mean "ALL" that will believe shall be saved, Jesus Said If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me, "ALL" means ALL, all through one man Adam have fallen and the same amount ALL through faith can be saved. all through adam can't mean all and all through Christ be redeem not mean all! brother think not more highly of yourself than you ought to for God hath given every man a measure of Faith, ( there i go again assuming every means every. and as I have said before calvinist accuses me of limiting words to one definiton, but to them ELECT only has one defintion, and that is how they misunderstand scriptures, the Jews where the elect/chosen. the Bible speaks of elect angels, is only one Lady going to be in Heaven for the Bible speaks of THE ELECT LADY!! I will not recant nothing my friend I am giving scriptures as they say and not twisting them to fit my doctrine

In 1John 1:2, what dies propitiation mean?

 

[His_disciple3]

In 1John 1:2, what dies propitiation mean?

before I answer that let me make sure that all knows that I am not denying that the Bible has predestination in it, it is just not predestination as the calvinist sees it, that is the reason in my response to the question of the thread that the Bible preaches both predestination by free will
now to answer your question;
It means the exact same thing that calvinist says is limited = atonement

but as you can see the Bible clearly says it is unlimited or for the whole world!!

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)
ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for propitiation:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROPITIATION, n. propisia''shon.

1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Rom.3. 1 John 2.

WOW LOOK EVEN IN THE GREEK IS MEANS ATONEMENT !!!!
PROPITIATION
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
1 John 2:2
propitiation
(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved. [For more detail see the full copyright page.])
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

 

[JM]

I listened to the first part of Mussler's message. He is a nut job.

lol

 

[Hammster]

before I answer that let me make sure that all knows that I am not denying that the Bible has predestination in it, it is just not predestination as the calvinist sees it, that is the reason in my response to the question of the thread that the Bible preaches both predestination by free will
now to answer your question;
It means the exact same thing that calvinist says is limited = atonement

but as you can see the Bible clearly says it is unlimited or for the whole world!!

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)
ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for propitiation:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROPITIATION, n. propisia''shon.

1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Rom.3. 1 John 2.

WOW LOOK EVEN IN THE GREEK IS MEANS ATONEMENT !!!!
PROPITIATION
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
1 John 2:2
propitiation
(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved. [For more detail see the full copyright page.])
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

The snide remarks aren't necessary. I am hoping to have a civil discussion.

Would you agree, then, that Jesus' sacrifice satisfied the Father's wrath against sinners?

 

[Hupomone10]

, I am sorta of simply minded, you know when The Bible says that Jesus Died for the whole world's sin in 1 John 2, I try to preach the bible for what it says, I was always told that if someone said that the Word don't mean what it says that that would be false teachings, we can't take two or three times that predestination in mentioned in scripture and completely ignore all other scriptures and make a true doctrine, man does not live by bread alone but by every word( see I did it again thinking that every means every), also i only turn to my greek or hebrew strong concordance, when i don't understand it in english or someone questions a scripture, I speak english, does that make anyless that someone who speaks three languages, only in man's eyes not in The eyes Of God! God didn't say that everyone would have to understand greek and or hebrew in order to understand His Word, actually He promosied that His Word would be published in every nation( I did it again assumed every means every) the whole/every Word of God, Paul says that the elect needs salvation, pauls says that Jesus died for Us that us might be redeemed , Jesus says in John 3 :17 that He came that some might be saved. he died for the world that some might be saved, if calvinist is right about limited atonement then that verse would read that he came for the world and that the world would be saved, if he only came for the world of the elect then that world in John 3:17 would be saved not might be saved, as far as my part I will skip the most part of your post and say this: God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always walk in the Spirit or always be filled with the Spirit, the Bible shows that the Spirit was poured out on the disciples more than once, comparing the promises concerning the Word of God and the promises concerning His Holy Spirit, I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows your ignorance concerning the Holy Spirit and His power, my only agenda is to Keep God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirt be lifted up, to preach the truth, defend the truth and help as many as I can to come to the knowledge of Chirst and Him crucified, and let them know that God commended His love toward them while they were yet sinners, and "ALL" I and I do mean "ALL" that will believe shall be saved, Jesus Said If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me, "ALL" means ALL, all through one man Adam have fallen and the same amount ALL through faith can be saved. all through adam can't mean all and all through Christ be redeem not mean all! brother think not more highly of yourself than you ought to for God hath given every man a measure of Faith, ( there i go again assuming every means every. and as I have said before calvinist accuses me of limiting words to one definiton, but to them ELECT only has one defintion, and that is how they misunderstand scriptures, the Jews where the elect/chosen. the Bible speaks of elect angels, is only one Lady going to be in Heaven for the Bible speaks of THE ELECT LADY!! I will not recant nothing my friend I am giving scriptures as they say and not twisting them to fit my doctrine

Look how long a treatise you had to write to get around simply looking up the word in the concordance and seeing if I was right. Pastors have to constantly "defend the turf," to defend the doctrine against all attacks from every direction, and therefore it is very hard for them to admit a misunderstanding in even the most trivial points.

I cannot read a paragraph so long and effectively digest it. Please address the point I made where the Word actually means "to redeem" not "might" redeem. Show evidence that I'm wrong or just simply to the disciple thing and admit it was a mistake. You won't be any less for it. Look at the detail with which you researched and answered Hammster's question on redemtion. I'm simply asking you do the same thing. Go to your concordance and check what I'm telling you.

Thanks,
H.

 

[Hupomone10]

I know you didn't just choose to ignore, but probably forgot this point. Please address it...

seeing that God also says that He will preserve His word, and John calvin lived from 10 July 1509 to 27 May 1564, and he being credited with the doctrine of grace, then we would have been around 1500 years without the true gospel according to calvinist, this also would say that for 1500 years we were without the true word of God or Gospel of Grace, but to me it would not be the true doctrine of Grace, but another gospel that the Bible warned us about, if anyone comes with another gospel let him be accursed.

I hate to change the subject, and if you've followed my posts at all you know that i am not a hyper-Calvinist or even a 5-point Calvinist, but I'm using this example to speak to the reasonableness of your argument:

The practice of speaking in tongues and ecstatic experiences attributed to the Holy Spirit in the Charismatic or pentecostal communities, and especially the practice of sharing something and telling people you were given "a word of knowledge" that was somehow supernaturally plopped down on you to share as "thus sayeth the Lord", can only be traced back to the Azuza Street revival (1900), or at the most back to Edward Irving (early 1800's).

So, in keeping with what you said about God preserving His Word regarding grace, should we say that for about 1800 years we were without the true doctrine of the Holy Spirit, speaking gibberish, and manifestations of the Holy Spirit such as falling backwards onto the ground and barking like dogs and laughing uncontrollably? And, as you said, to me this would not be the true doctrine of the Holy Spirit but another doctrine.

What do you think? Do you see the correlation? If Calvin teaching grace or Luther teaching salvation by faith cannot be true because this means God didn't preserve His Word for 1500 years, then neither can the Charismatic ecstatic experiences be considered authentic for the same reason. God didn't preserve this for 1800+ years.

If you are willing to concede the latter, I will revisit the former.

In Christ,
H.

 

[His_disciple3]

Look how long a treatise you had to write to get around simply looking up the word in the concordance and seeing if I was right. Pastors have to constantly "defend the turf," to defend the doctrine against all attacks from every direction, and therefore it is very hard for them to admit a misunderstanding in even the most trivial points.

I cannot read a paragraph so long and effectively digest it. Please address the point I made where the Word actually means "to redeem" not "might" redeem. Show evidence that I'm wrong or just simply to the disciple thing and admit it was a mistake. You won't be any less for it. Look at the detail with which you researched and answered Hammster's question on redemtion. I'm simply asking you do the same thing. Go to your concordance and check what I'm telling you.

Thanks,
H.

I have already done this once But I will do it again for you>

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)

ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for might:
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:

MIGHT, n. pret. of may. Had power or liberty. He might go, or might have gone.
1. It sometimes denotes was possible, implying ignorance of the fact in the speaker. Orders might have been given for the purpose.

 

[His_disciple3]

I know you didn't just choose to ignore, but probably forgot this point. Please address it...
.

I did sorry you missed it, seems like I am having to post everything twice for you, but glad to do it:

God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always walk in the Spirit or always be filled with the Spirit, the Bible shows that the Spirit was poured out on the disciples more than once, comparing the promises concerning the Word of God and the promises concerning His Holy Spirit, I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows your ignorance concerning the Holy Spirit and His power,

but we must get back to the topic of the post, however there was given in scriptures a prophet who's daughters also prohecised and they were not of the orginal twelve, in Acts 19 some disciples were given the Spirit baptism that spoke in tongues and prophecised so your information about it only happening in the 1900's is false,

 

[VCViking]

Please don't take over another thread with your nonsense. We all already know that you have an agenda and that you haven't a clue to what you are talking about. Repeating the same montra in every thread doesn't help your cause. You have actually become boring.

 

[Hupomone10]

I have already done this once But I will do it again for you>

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)

ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for might:
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:

MIGHT, n. pret. of may. Had power or liberty. He might go, or might have gone.
1. It sometimes denotes was possible, implying ignorance of the fact in the speaker. Orders might have been given for the purpose.

So you refuse to look at the real Greek word used and the modern meaning of that Greek word? I understand some of the frustration some of these guys have had with you.

You may use the type of Bible study that takes a 1700's translation of a Greek word into English (The KJV translation of 'might'), and then gives a detailed modern definition of that word instead of the modern English equivalent of the Greek word, but I cannot do so.

 

[Hupomone10]

I did sorry you missed it, seems like I am having to post everything twice for you, but glad to do it:



but we must get back to the topic of the post, however there was given in scriptures a prophet who's daughters also prohecised and they were not of the orginal twelve, in Acts 19 some disciples were given the Spirit baptism that spoke in tongues and prophecised so your information about it only happening in the 1900's is false,

Thank you for limiting it to the response to this post. You need to go back and read, or perhaps ask the Spirit again what I said, for I didn't say it ONLY happened in the 1900's. You either misunderstood or are deliberately misrepresenting it.

It was you who made the initial point of a doctrine (grace) being re-introduced to the church in the 1500's is a contradiction to God preserving His Word, not me. (see your own quote below) It is the point that you now say in your quote is like comparing "apples to apes" and "shows your ignorance."

So, probably the best way to get this across is to state it and include your own answer as answer to yourself:

Your initial point

seeing that God also says that He will preserve His word, and John calvin lived from 10 July 1509 to 27 May 1564, and he being credited with the doctrine of grace, then we would have been around 1500 years without the true gospel according to calvinist, this also would say that for 1500 years we were without the true word of God or Gospel of Grace

To answer you, here are your own words, with parentheses to make it applicable

God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always (teach an accurate presentation of the gospel), the Bible shows that the (gospel was recorded more than once), I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this (comparing the Word of God being preserved to the doctrine of salvation by grace being preserved) is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows (my own) ignorance concerning (God) and His power,

The saddest thing, to me, is that you say in your profile that you are able to give a 'word of knowledge' to people, and yet you cannot see these things that are so plain.

Jer. 25:27
'Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, "Drink, be drunk, vomit, fall, and rise no more because of the sword which I will send among you."'

God sometimes says this to people, not because He wants them to get drunk, but because they are going to go on in their folly regardless of what He says.

 

[His_disciple3]

So you refuse to look at the real Greek word used and the modern meaning of that Greek word? I understand some of the frustration some of these guys have had with you.

You may use the type of Bible study that takes a 1700's translation of a Greek word into English (The KJV translation of 'might'), and then gives a detailed modern definition of that word instead of the modern English equivalent of the Greek word, but I cannot do so.

you know I have already told you once sir I speak english. greek is greek to me. alot of blood sweat and tears was shed that I may open my KJB and come to the Knowledge Of My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. and I gave you the 1828 webster definition to if you call that a modern day defintion then that's you. If there is a contradiction in scriptures then we need to throw it away and look for another, If one place says that Jesus died for the whole World then All other places referring to whom He died for should agree along with that one Place, to say that He died for the whole world in 1 John 2 then to say that John 3:16 the same author of 1 John 2 ,tells us that He only died for the World of the Elect is a contradiction in scriptures. in a sense you are right For he did truly only die for those that will believe, to the others His death was in vain, but He did die that all Might come to the knowledge, if all means that all fell when Adam sinned then all must mean that all can be redeemed by one Jesus, when the Blood was shed. if not we have another contradiction, or a god that is not just and a god that is a respect of persons, this just can't be, Now I am not the one that said, that He is not a respect of persons or a just God:HE DID! I am not judging God: His Testimony given By scriptures ARE!! so twist it as you will, But I am holding my faith in the God that Died for "ALL" but knowing that some will refuse that Love and die without Him!! I holding My faith In the God that knowing that if only one person would receive His Love, and be washed in the Blood, then He would have still died for that one person, His creation that would choose to trust in Him. It is By grace through Faith in The Son that we are saved, not election!

 

[Hammster]

before I answer that let me make sure that all knows that I am not denying that the Bible has predestination in it, it is just not predestination as the calvinist sees it, that is the reason in my response to the question of the thread that the Bible preaches both predestination by free will
now to answer your question;
It means the exact same thing that calvinist says is limited = atonement

but as you can see the Bible clearly says it is unlimited or for the whole world!!

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)
ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for propitiation:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROPITIATION, n. propisia''shon.

1. The act of appeasing wrath and conciliating the favor of an offended person; the act of making propitious.
2. In theology, the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners. Christ is the propitiation for the sins of men. Rom.3. 1 John 2.

WOW LOOK EVEN IN THE GREEK IS MEANS ATONEMENT !!!!
PROPITIATION
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)
1 John 2:2
propitiation
(Interlinear Transliterated Bible. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved. [For more detail see the full copyright page.])
NT:2434
NT:2434
<START GREEK>i(lasmo/$
<END GREEK> hilasmos (hil-as-mos'); atonement, i.e. (concretely) an expiator:

KJV - propitiation.
(Biblesoft's New Exhaustive Strong's Numbers and Concordance with Expanded Greek-Hebrew Dictionary. Copyright © 1994, 2003, 2006 Biblesoft, Inc. and International Bible Translators, Inc.)

The snide remarks aren't necessary. I am hoping to have a civil discussion.

Would you agree, then, that Jesus' sacrifice satisfied the Father's wrath against sinners?

 

[cimbk]

, I am sorta of simply minded, you know when The Bible says that Jesus Died for the whole world's sin in 1 John 2, I try to preach the bible for what it says, I was always told that if someone said that the Word don't mean what it says that that would be false teachings, we can't take two or three times that predestination in mentioned in scripture and completely ignore all other scriptures and make a true doctrine, man does not live by bread alone but by every word( see I did it again thinking that every means every), also i only turn to my greek or hebrew strong concordance, when i don't understand it in english or someone questions a scripture, I speak english, does that make anyless that someone who speaks three languages, only in man's eyes not in The eyes Of God! God didn't say that everyone would have to understand greek and or hebrew in order to understand His Word, actually He promosied that His Word would be published in every nation( I did it again assumed every means every) the whole/every Word of God, Paul says that the elect needs salvation, pauls says that Jesus died for Us that us might be redeemed , Jesus says in John 3 :17 that He came that some might be saved. he died for the world that some might be saved, if calvinist is right about limited atonement then that verse would read that he came for the world and that the world would be saved, if he only came for the world of the elect then that world in John 3:17 would be saved not might be saved, as far as my part I will skip the most part of your post and say this: God promised that He would preserve His word, He never promised that we would always walk in the Spirit or always be filled with the Spirit, the Bible shows that the Spirit was poured out on the disciples more than once, comparing the promises concerning the Word of God and the promises concerning His Holy Spirit, I am sorry to put it this way but know no other way to put it, My friend this is like comparing apples with apes, and it really to me just shows your ignorance concerning the Holy Spirit and His power, my only agenda is to Keep God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirt be lifted up, to preach the truth, defend the truth and help as many as I can to come to the knowledge of Chirst and Him crucified, and let them know that God commended His love toward them while they were yet sinners, and "ALL" I and I do mean "ALL" that will believe shall be saved, Jesus Said If I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me, "ALL" means ALL, all through one man Adam have fallen and the same amount ALL through faith can be saved. all through adam can't mean all and all through Christ be redeem not mean all! brother think not more highly of yourself than you ought to for God hath given every man a measure of Faith, ( there i go again assuming every means every. and as I have said before calvinist accuses me of limiting words to one definiton, but to them ELECT only has one defintion, and that is how they misunderstand scriptures, the Jews where the elect/chosen. the Bible speaks of elect angels, is only one Lady going to be in Heaven for the Bible speaks of THE ELECT LADY!! I will not recant nothing my friend I am giving scriptures as they say and not twisting them to fit my doctrine

as your typing if you hit the "enter" key you can put a space in between your paragraphs........I just figured it out myself......makes for much easier reading.........by the way I agree with you