Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

[redleghunter]

Ok then please show me where the translation is incorrect. As I said I’ve compared it to the Greek interlinear and in this case it is accurate.

I look at the interlinear as well and the NLT adds words not there. Why? Because it’s a paraphrase.

Interlinear
John 15:2 Interlinear: every branch in me not bearing fruit, He doth take it away, and every one bearing fruit, He doth cleanse by pruning it, that it may bear more fruit;


New Living Translation
He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn't produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more.

Now compare literal translations which do not contain “cut off”

English Standard Version
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit

New American Standard Bible
"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

King James Bible
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit

 

[BNR32FAN]

The reassurance is evident in verses John:15-18.

And as I stated if verses 15-18 is a reassurance then verses 1-8 are impossible thus making this message useless. Jesus says

Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.

This statement is completely useless because according to you they cannot fail to abide because Jesus has assured them they will abide because He has chosen them. So why say abide in Me if they cannot fail to abide? Why say the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine so NEITHER CAN YOU UNLESS YOU ABIDE IN ME if Jesus is reassuring them that they will undoubtedly produce fruit and cannot fail to produce fruit because He has chosen them?

I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing.

Look at verse 7

If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
‭‭
Why say “If you abide in Me”? That does not sound very reassuring. The word “if” implies something that is conditional.

The truth is this message contradicts eternal security which means that Calvinism is an incorrect teaching. It’s very plain to see there’s no smoke & mirrors here. No need for jumping around the Bible to make things fit together. It’s all here in one message. It’s also in other scriptures for example the parable of the talents is a parallel message. The lazy servant of the master was thrown out into darkness where there is weeping and knashing of teeth because he was lazy and didn’t produce any profit. The fig tree that didn’t produce fruit was condemned to wither and die. The tree that didn’t produce fruit for 3 years owner told the gardener to cut it down but the gardener suggested to give it one more year while gave it special attention and if it still didn’t produce fruit after that year he would cut it down. All of these parables are giving the same message.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I look at the interlinear as well and the NLT adds words not there. Why? Because it’s a paraphrase.

Interlinear
John 15:2 Interlinear: every branch in me not bearing fruit, He doth take it away, and every one bearing fruit, He doth cleanse by pruning it, that it may bear more fruit;


New Living Translation
He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn't produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more.

Now compare literal translations which do not contain “cut off”

English Standard Version
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit

New American Standard Bible
"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

King James Bible
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit

Now look at the definition of the Greek word used which is aírō (G142). Keep in mind this branch is “in Christ” so it is attached to the vine. Now look at the definition of the Greek word aírō that is pertaining to something that is attached.

Definition

1) to raise up, elevate, lift up a) to raise from the ground, take up: stones b) to raise upwards, elevate, lift up: the hand c) to draw up: a fish

2) to take upon one's self and carry what has been raised up, to bear

3) to bear away what has been raised, carry off a) to move from its place b) to take off or away what is attached to anything c) to remove d) to carry off, carry away with one e) to appropriate what is taken f) to take away from another what is his or what is committed to him, to take by force g) to take and apply to any use h) to take from among the living, either by a natural death, or by violence i) cause to cease

Who cares whether he version says cut off or broken off the result is still the same. In order for it to be taken off or removed it must be either cut or broken off. Your argument is completely irrelevant and has absolutely no bearing on the context and doesn’t change the outcome of the message at all. Why would you even post this? I’ve already shown this definition in my original post about a John 15.

First let’s examine verses 1 & 2.


““I am the true grapevine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn’t produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more.”

John 15:1-2 NLT


The Father “cuts off” every branch “of mine” that doesn’t produce fruit. Before we look at cuts off notice Jesus says “of mine”. These branches are believers. They are already grafted into the vine. We will see more evidence of this later in my explanation. So let’s look at the full definition of the Greek word used for the term “cuts off” which is aírō (G142).


Definition

1) to raise up, elevate, lift up a) to raise from the ground, take up: stones b) to raise upwards, elevate, lift up: the hand c) to draw up: a fish

2) to take upon one's self and carry what has been raised up, to bear

3) to bear away what has been raised, carry off a) to move from its place b) to take off or away what is attached to anything c) to remove d) to carry off, carry away with one e) to appropriate what is taken f) to take away from another what is his or what is committed to him, to take by force g) to take and apply to any use h) to take from among the living, either by a natural death, or by violence i) cause to cease


Notice the bold letters in the definition. To take off or away what is attached to anything. The branch is attached to the vine. When the Greek word aírō is used in reference to something that is attached to something the correct definition is removed or detached. The term taken away is also used which still implies the same thing. If someone is taken away from the vine (Jesus) they become detached or removed from Him which cannot result in salvation. Let’s continue there’s plenty more evidence to confirm this.

 

[redleghunter]

The truth is this message contradicts eternal security which means that Calvinism is an incorrect teaching.

I already refuted this six times. Your entire 10 verse proof text pretext is dashed by verses 15-18 with the preservation language.

I also gave you a brief expository of chapters 13 through 17 to understand the context.

If you want to do dueling proof texts then John 10 proves those in Christ will never perish and endure to the end. Proving Calvinism is Biblical and I therefore declare victory as I have more verses than you do.

That would be great if I followed your erroneous method of slicing and dicing the Bible via eisegesis.

 

[redleghunter]

Now look at the definition of the Greek word used which is aírō (G142). Keep in mind this branch is “in Christ” so it is attached to the vine. Now look at the definition of the Greek word aírō that is pertaining to something that is attached.

Definition

1) to raise up, elevate, lift up a) to raise from the ground, take up: stones b) to raise upwards, elevate, lift up: the hand c) to draw up: a fish

2) to take upon one's self and carry what has been raised up, to bear

3) to bear away what has been raised, carry off a) to move from its place b) to take off or away what is attached to anything c) to remove d) to carry off, carry away with one e) to appropriate what is taken f) to take away from another what is his or what is committed to him, to take by force g) to take and apply to any use h) to take from among the living, either by a natural death, or by violence i) cause to cease

Who cares whether he version says cut off or broken off the result is still the same. In order for it to be taken off or removed it must be either cut or broken off. Your argument is completely irrelevant and has absolutely no bearing on the context and doesn’t change the outcome of the message at all. Why would you even post this? I’ve already shown this definition in my original post about a John 15.

Cut off and take away are not the same.

Take away can mean take to the woodshed for chastisement.

Plus we already know the Scriptures do not contradict. In the same Gospel the sheep never perish.

Decisional “free will” (which is in bondage to sin) regeneration is driving you to create an isolated theology on why so many “Christians” are living like Caligula. Seems some churches need to get their houses in order.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I look at the interlinear as well and the NLT adds words not there. Why? Because it’s a paraphrase.

Interlinear
John 15:2 Interlinear: every branch in me not bearing fruit, He doth take it away, and every one bearing fruit, He doth cleanse by pruning it, that it may bear more fruit;


New Living Translation
He cuts off every branch of mine that doesn't produce fruit, and he prunes the branches that do bear fruit so they will produce even more.

Now compare literal translations which do not contain “cut off”

English Standard Version
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit

New American Standard Bible
"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes it so that it may bear more fruit.

King James Bible
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit

By the way I wouldn’t hold the ASV in such high regard. I’ve recently learned that it has a lot of omissions in it even an entire sentence in The Lord’s Prayer.

Matthew 6:13 for example

“And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:13‬ ‭ASV‬‬

“And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:13‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? But he turned, and rebuked them. And they went to another village.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭9:54-56‬ ‭ASV‬‬

“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭9:54-56‬ ‭KJV‬‬

There are many other examples. I can’t imagine why they cut out that part of The Lord’s Prayer. I use the NLT in some situations but typically I double check it first to make sure the translation is correct. I know the NLT is not a very good translation in many places but at least 90% of it is correct. Typically I use it when the translation is correct because it’s easier for everyone to understand.

 

[redleghunter]

And as I stated if verses 15-18 is a reassurance then verses 1-8 are impossible thus making this message useless.

Once again not if taken in the actual context of that historical night. Jesus just didn’t out of the blue start talking about vines and branches like a swami rattling off sayings.

The context begins in chapter 13. By the time we get to the Vine and branches a historical event happens. Satan enters Judas leaves Jesus and the 11 to betray Christ. John knows this because Jesus tells him. The 11 know Judas is not there in their intimate circle. The Vine and branches is to reassure them they were not like Judas and “this” is what right looks like. Then tells them they have fruit and it will be preserved.

 

[redleghunter]

By the way I wouldn’t hold the ASV in such high regard. I’ve recently learned that it has a lot of omissions in it even an entire sentence in The Lord’s Prayer.

Matthew 6:13 for example

“And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:13‬ ‭ASV‬‬

“And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:13‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven, and consume them? But he turned, and rebuked them. And they went to another village.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭9:54-56‬ ‭ASV‬‬

“And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭9:54-56‬ ‭KJV‬‬

There are many other examples. I can’t imagine why they cut out that part of The Lord’s Prayer. I use the NLT in some situations but typically I double check it first to make sure the translation is correct. I know the NLT is not a very good translation in many places but at least 90% of it is correct. Typically I use it when the translation is correct because it’s easier for everyone to understand.

Did I quote from the ASV? No.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Once again not if taken in the actual context of that historical night. Jesus just didn’t out of the blue start talking about vines and branches like a swami rattling off sayings.

The context begins in chapter 13. By the time we get to the Vine and branches a historical event happens. Satan enters Judas leaves Jesus and the 11 to betray Christ. John knows this because Jesus tells him. The 11 know Judas is not there in their intimate circle. The Vine and branches is to reassure them they were not like Judas and “this” is what right looks like. Then tells them they have fruit and it will be preserved.

The message is so they don’t become like Judas.

 

[redleghunter]

Why say “If you abide in Me”? That does not sound very reassuring. The word “if” implies something that is conditional.

Judas didn’t and Jesus was making that point.

You can’t divorce the text from the context.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Did I quote from the ASV? No.

Umm yes actually you did

Did I quote from the ASV? No.

Sorry my mistake

 

[redleghunter]

The message is so they don’t become like Judas.

And once again the issue is no fruit to begin with. Now what did Jesus tell them in verses 15-18? They had fruit and it would remain. Telling them you are not Judas.

 

[redleghunter]

Umm yes actually you did


Sorry my mistake

It’s more an issue of the Critical text vs the Byzantine text for the examples you gave. The versions which use the Byzantine type text are KJV, WEB, YLT. That is the shorthand as there are various manuscripts used within those three versions. The Eastern Orthodox also use their patriarch version of the Byzantine. Most modern Bibles use the Critical Text. As I said that’s the shorthand as there is much detail to consider and an entirely different discussion.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Judas didn’t and Jesus was making that point.

You can’t divorce the text from the context.

The apostles thought Judas went to take care of other business. They didn’t think anything about him being gone.

“For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, Buy those things that we have need of against the feast; or, that he should give something to the poor.”
‭‭John‬ ‭13:29‬

Not to mention Judas was never grafted into the vine. Jesus knew Judas didn’t believe and would later betray Him according to John 6:64. The message is to the apostles. Like I said you says the word “you” like 13 times to them in verses 1-10. The message was pertaining to them.

 

[redleghunter]

Not to mention Judas was never grafted into the vine. Jesus knew Judas didn’t believe and would later betray Him according to John 6:64. The message is to the apostles. Like I said you says the word “you” like 13 times to them in verses 1-10. The message was pertaining to them.

Jesus was showing them what right discipleship looks like compared to those who are not in Him. This was not a dissertation on lost salvation. That’s the pretext you create. Why? Because He reassures them in verses 15-18 that they are abiding in Him.

The only warning one can come up with in context is how to identify a true disciple from a false one. And in every case the false never produced fruit in the first place. Akin to the sowing of seeds and the wheat and tares. Jesus is very concrete and establishes dichotomies in His discourses and parables. It’s always “either or” and never shades of grey. One is either a sheep or not. One is either abiding or not. It’s never a little abiding then not. It’s never no abiding then later abiding then no abiding and abiding again. Christ never taught such schizophrenic theology as some peddle here.

Concrete yes or no. The Spirit testifies with our spirit that we are children of God. Concrete answer right there.

 

[redleghunter]

The apostles thought Judas went to take care of other business. They didn’t think anything about him being gone.

Except Peter and John did know.

21When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me.” 22The disciples beganlooking at one another, at a loss to know of which one He was speaking. 23There was reclining on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24So Simon Peter gestured to him, and said to him, “Tell us who it is of whom He is speaking.” 25He, leaning back thus on Jesus’ bosom, said to Him, “Lord, who is it?” 26Jesus then answered, “That is the one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.” So when He had dipped the morsel, He took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 27After the morsel, Satan then entered into him. Therefore Jesus said to him, “What you do, do quickly.” 28Now no one of those reclining at the table knew for what purpose He had said this to him. 29For some were supposing, because Judas had the money box, that Jesus was saying to him, “Buy the things we have need of for the feast”; or else, that he should give something to the poor. 30So after receiving the morsel he went out immediately; and it was night.

 

[BABerean2]

You keep pounding Sinai when they have only spoken of moral law. The moral law has never changed from Eden. It’s about obedience to God.

The term "the moral law" is found nowhere in the Bible.
It is a term that has been invented to make Reformed Covenant Theology work.

I am not pounding Sinai.
It was a temporary covenant that had a purpose, according to Galatians 3:16-29.
Paul said it was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come, to whom the promise was made.
Proponents of Reformed Covenant Theology must ignore this passage to make their doctrine work.


Modern Judaisers cannot let go of the Sinai Covenant, and embrace the New Covenant found in Hebrews 8:6-13.


Pastor John G. Reisinger went to be with the Lord a few days ago.
He was a Reformed Baptist who let go of Reformed Covenant Theology and embraced the New Covenant, found in Hebrews 12:18-24.
In the video below he exposes the problems with both Dispensationalism and Reformed Covenant Theology.

.

 

[redleghunter]

The term "the moral law" is found nowhere in the Bible.

Are you familiar with a term known as systematic theology?

It is a term that has been invented to make Reformed Covenant Theology work.

Actually you may want to look at what a systematic approach means.

It was a temporary covenant that had a purpose, according to Galatians 3:16-29.
Paul said it was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come, to whom the promise was made.

What is the one golden thread (truth) throughout the Holy Scriptures from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22?

It is God's Holiness and Sovereignty.

Proponents of Reformed Covenant Theology must ignore this passage to make their doctrine work.

Actually you can't defeat a systematic approach which is not based on a few out of context verses.

Modern Judaisers cannot let go of the Sinai Covenant, .

Then stop.

Pastor John G. Reisinger went to be with the Lord a few days ago.
He was a Reformed Baptist who let go of Reformed Covenant Theology and embraced the New Covenant, found in Hebrews 12:18-24.
In the video below he exposes the problems with both Dispensationalism and Reformed Covenant Theology.

I am sorry for your loss, however this is not the area of CF to promote internet YouTube theologians. This is I think the third time you have come by with (1) an assertion "Calvinism is evil" type of statement (2) a tommy gun spray of verses out of context and (3) promoting your "cult like" links.

 

[JLB777]

Posted on February 17, 2015by jm
THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT FAITH AND REPENTANCE ARE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. (Acts 5) … Continue reading →

Those who obey the Gospel will be saved if they continue.


God, who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath.
Romans 2:6-8

• eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;

JLB

 

[BNR32FAN]

Jesus was showing them what right discipleship looks like compared to those who are not in Him. This was not a dissertation on lost salvation. That’s the pretext you create. Why? Because He reassures them in verses 15-18 that they are abiding in Him.

The only warning one can come up with in context is how to identify a true disciple from a false one. And in every case the false never produced fruit in the first place. Akin to the sowing of seeds and the wheat and tares. Jesus is very concrete and establishes dichotomies in His discourses and parables. It’s always “either or” and never shades of grey. One is either a sheep or not. One is either abiding or not. It’s never a little abiding then not. It’s never no abiding then later abiding then no abiding and abiding again. Christ never taught such schizophrenic theology as some peddle here.

Concrete yes or no. The Spirit testifies with our spirit that we are children of God. Concrete answer right there.

There’s too many “if’s” in His statements to be a reassurance. Both of which indicate a contingency or uncertainty.

John 15:4

4 remain in me, and I in you, as the branch is not able to bear fruit of itself, if it may not remain in the vine, so neither ye, if ye may not remain in me.

John 15:6

6 if any one may not remain in me, he was cast forth without as the branch, and was withered, and they gather them, and cast to fire, and they are burned;

John 15:7

7 if ye may remain in me, and my sayings in you may remain, whatever ye may wish ye shall ask, and it shall be done to you.

John 15:10

10 if my commandments ye may keep, ye shall remain in my love, according as I the commands of my Father have kept, and do remain in His love;

John 15:14

14 ye are my friends, if ye may do whatever I command you;