Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

[BNR32FAN]

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.

Where does it say Peter and John did know? From what I see they didn’t understand why Jesus said this.

John 13:24

24 Simon Peter, then, doth beckon to this one, to inquire who he may be concerning whom he speaketh,


John 13:25

25 and that one having leant back on the breast of Jesus, respondeth to him, ‘Sir, who is it?’


John 13:26

26 Jesus answereth, ‘That one it is to whom I, having dipped the morsel, shall give it;’ and having dipped the morsel, he giveth [it] to Judas of Simon, Iscariot.


John 13:27

27 And after the morsel, then the Adversary entered into that one, Jesus, therefore, saith to him, ‘What thou dost – do quickly;’


John 13:28

28 and none of those reclining knew for what intent he said this to him,


John 13:29

29 for certain were thinking, since Judas had the bag, that Jesus saith to him, ‘Buy what we have need of for the feast;’ or that he may give something to the poor;

 

[redleghunter]

Where does it say Peter and John did know? From what I see they didn’t understand why Jesus said this.

You just quoted it. Did you read what you posted? Peter and John knew who put the morsel in.

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 began looking 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.

 

[redleghunter]

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;

You must have missed this post:

Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

 

[redleghunter]

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

So your point is salvation in Christ is uncertain. We should remain in uncertainty? Well if you will want to persist in eisegesis verse plucking, I declare now victory in refuting this notion with:

John 14: NASB

1“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2“In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3“If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

Boom, the uncertainty is completely destroyed from the same Gospel. See how that works? You can't base a coherent theology without some systematic approach from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. Hop Scotch verse plucking is not a coherent theology.

Let's look at the 'if' statements in John 15:

John 15: NASB
1“I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2“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. 3“You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4“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. 5“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. 6“If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. 7“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8“My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. 9“Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. 10“If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. 11“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full.


12“This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. 13“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends. 14“You are My friends if you do what I command you. 15“No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16“You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you. 17“This I command you, that you love one another.

The if statements are clear. Jesus established a clear dichotomy here. One is either His or is not His. Those who are His are chosen, appointed that they would go and bear fruit, and that the fruit would remain.

If I am the 11 standing there hearing ALL of the words of Jesus and NOT JUST verses 1-10, I would be comforted I was not considered a Judas but a friend (verse 14).

I can't help but keep pointing this out to you but you ignore the context which I even jotted down an basic expository of the context here:

Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

 

[BABerean2]

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.

Pastor Reisinger went to be in the presence of Christ before we did.
It is not a loss. He is in a better place.

(1) I never said Calvinism is "evil". It is wrong.

(2) If you can show where I took any scripture out of context, please show us where.

(3) When sources based on scripture are labeled as "cult-like" we should all know how far the modern Church has veered off course.

.

 

[redleghunter]

(1) I never said Calvinism is "evil". It is wrong.

Ok still waiting for a coherent exposition to refute Reformed theology.

(2) If you can show where I took any scripture out of context, please show us where.

The very fact none of the plucked out verses applied to refuting Reformed theology. Maybe they do but you never explain why, but just post verses without commentary or argument.

What you have right now are assertions. Assertions differ from arguments. Arguments have facts supporting the position posed. Assertions do not. I don't do assertion wars.

(3) When sources based on scripture are labeled as "cult-like" we should all know how far the modern Church has veered off course.

It was not the Scriptures but the constant video streaming to make your point. Make the point. I can toss out videos too, but do not 'subcontract' my arguments to You Tube.

 

[BABerean2]

The very fact none of the plucked out verses applied to refuting Reformed theology. Maybe they do but you never explain why, but just post verses without commentary or argument.

What you have right now are assertions. Assertions differ from arguments. Arguments have facts supporting the position posed. Assertions do not. I don't do assertion wars.

Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

In the passage above Paul reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.
It was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.


Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
(Paul compares the Sinai Covenant to "bondage".)
Gal 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
(The New Jerusalem found in Hebrews 11:15-16, and Hebrews 12:22-24 is our destination.)
Gal 4:27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
Gal 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

In the passage above Paul uses Hagar as a symbol of the Sinai Covenant of "bondage".
Paul then compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" Hagar, which is the symbol of the Sinai Covenant.

.

 

[redleghunter]

In the passage above Paul reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.
It was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.

No one argues against these facts.

In the passage above Paul uses Hagar as a symbol of the Sinai Covenant of "bondage".
Paul then compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" Hagar, which is the symbol of the Sinai Covenant.

Again no one argues against these facts.

No one argued the Sinai covenant was still in effect. You persist at this but show me where someone actually made this argument and ping them as well.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You just quoted it. Did you read what you posted? Peter and John knew who put the morsel in.

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 began looking 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.

What does verse 28 say?

 

[JM]

Wow, intense.

 

[redleghunter]

What does verse 28 say?

The others did not know.

Peter was at the other side of the table directly across from Jesus and John, with Christ and the beloved disciple (John) on the other side. John was leaning on Christ. Everyone else was leaning at the table on the wings and shorter end "u" portion.

So from the text we at very least know John knew. And I'm sure Peter knew as he asked John to get the information from Jesus.

 

[BNR32FAN]

So your point is salvation in Christ is uncertain. We should remain in uncertainty? Well if you will want to persist in eisegesis verse plucking, I declare now victory in refuting this notion with:

John 14: NASB

1“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2“In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3“If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

Boom, the uncertainty is completely destroyed from the same Gospel. See how that works? You can't base a coherent theology without some systematic approach from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. Hop Scotch verse plucking is not a coherent theology.

Let's look at the 'if' statements in John 15:

John 15: NASB
1“I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2“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. 3“You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4“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. 5“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. 6“If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. 7“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8“My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. 9“Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. 10“If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. 11“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full.


12“This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. 13“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends. 14“You are My friends if you do what I command you. 15“No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16“You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you. 17“This I command you, that you love one another.

The if statements are clear. Jesus established a clear dichotomy here. One is either His or is not His. Those who are His are chosen, appointed that they would go and bear fruit, and that the fruit would remain.

If I am the 11 standing there hearing ALL of the words of Jesus and NOT JUST verses 1-10, I would be comforted I was not considered a Judas but a friend (verse 14).

I can't help but keep pointing this out to you but you ignore the context which I even jotted down an basic expository of the context here:

Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

Lol you just keep ignoring the context with all the “if’s”. I see it for what it says not for what I want it to say. When I began studying this about 2 years ago I believed in eternal security and my intention was to debunk the notion that John 15 refutes eternal security. The more I studied it the more evidence I found that I was wrong. I absolutely did not want to see it that eternal security was false. I had been defending eternal security with a fierce passion and admitting that John 15 contradicts eternal security meant that I had to go and recant all my posts, apologize, and admit that I was wrong to all those I had been debating with. This was something I was not looking forward to. But more than anything I am concerned with both learning and teaching the truth of God’s word and if I have to humble myself and admit my mistakes so be it because I’m not doing this for my glory I’m doing this for God’s glory. So don’t think for one minute that I am too arrogant or high and mighty to admit my mistakes. I’ve been there done that already. If you are reassuring someone that they will abide you do not say to them if you abide. In verse 16 Jesus is telling them why He chose them. He’s basically saying I didn’t choose you to sit around and do nothing I chose you so that you would go and produce fruit. He is not saying because I chose you you cannot fail to abide and produce fruit. The phrase if you abide is not an assurance it’s a conditional statement of uncertainty.

 

[redleghunter]

Lol you just keep ignoring the context with all the “if’s”. I see it for what it says not for what I want it to say. When I began studying this about 2 years ago I believed in eternal security and my intention was to debunk the notion that John 15 refutes eternal security. The more I studied it the more evidence I found that I was wrong. I absolutely did not want to see it that eternal security was false. I had been defending eternal security with a fierce passion and admitting that John 15 contradicts eternal security meant that I had to go and recant all my posts, apologize, and admit that I was wrong to all those I had been debating with. This was something I was not looking forward to. But more than anything I am concerned with both learning and teaching the truth of God’s word and if I have to humble myself and admit my mistakes so be it because I’m not doing this for my glory I’m doing this for God’s glory. So don’t think for one minute that I am too arrogant or high and mighty to admit my mistakes. I’ve been there done that already. If you are reassuring someone that they will abide you do not say to them if you abide. In verse 16 Jesus is telling them why He chose them. He’s basically saying I didn’t choose you to sit around and do nothing I chose you so that you would go and produce fruit. He is not saying because I chose you you cannot fail to abide and produce fruit. The phrase if you abide is not an assurance it’s a conditional statement of uncertainty.

I've put the 'if's' in context thus refuting your pretext. "If" statements have a "then" and we don't get to all the "then's" until through verse 18.

You have created an out of context theory using 10 verses ignoring pertinent information. I'm not going in circles on this. If you want to do dueling verses out of context, I will win that contest as well and do so in Big Bold Red Letters from Christ.

You can beat the isolated pretext all day and come to suitable conclusions to appease your theory. However, I exposed it by just letting the context and narrative tell the story.

 

[BNR32FAN]

So your point is salvation in Christ is uncertain. We should remain in uncertainty? Well if you will want to persist in eisegesis verse plucking, I declare now victory in refuting this notion with:

John 14: NASB

1“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2“In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. 3“If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.

Boom, the uncertainty is completely destroyed from the same Gospel. See how that works? You can't base a coherent theology without some systematic approach from Genesis 1 to Revelation 22. Hop Scotch verse plucking is not a coherent theology.

Let's look at the 'if' statements in John 15:

John 15: NASB
1“I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2“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. 3“You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. 4“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. 5“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. 6“If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned. 7“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8“My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. 9“Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. 10“If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. 11“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full.


12“This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you. 13“Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends. 14“You are My friends if you do what I command you. 15“No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. 16“You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you. 17“This I command you, that you love one another.

The if statements are clear. Jesus established a clear dichotomy here. One is either His or is not His. Those who are His are chosen, appointed that they would go and bear fruit, and that the fruit would remain.

If I am the 11 standing there hearing ALL of the words of Jesus and NOT JUST verses 1-10, I would be comforted I was not considered a Judas but a friend (verse 14).

I can't help but keep pointing this out to you but you ignore the context which I even jotted down an basic expository of the context here:

Is "Calvinism" Biblical?

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.

4 μείνατε (abide) G3306 V-AMA-2P ἐν (in) G1722 Prep ἐμοί (me) G1473 PPro-D1S κἀγὼ (I also) G2504 PPro-S1C ἐν (in) G1722 Prep ὑμῖν (you) G4771 PPro-D2P καθὼς (As) G2531 Adv τὸ (the) G3588 Art-NNS κλῆμα (branch) G2814 N-NNS οὐ (cannot) G3756 Adv δύναται (cannot) G1410 V-PIM/P-3S καρπὸν (fruit) G2590 N-AMS φέρειν (bear) G5342 V-PNA ἀφ’ (of) G575 Prep ἑαυτοῦ (itself) G1438 RefPro-GM3S ἐὰν (unless) G1437 Conj μὴ (not) G3361 Adv μένῃ (abide) G3306 V-PSA-3S ἐν (in) G1722 Prep τῇ (the) G3588 Art-DFS ἀμπέλῳ (vine) G288 N-DFS οὕτως (so) G3779 Adv οὐδὲ (neither) G3761 Adv ὑμεῖς (you) G4771 PPro-N2P ἐὰν (if) G1437 Conj μὴ (not) G3361 Adv ἐν (in) G1722 Prep ἐμοὶ (me) G1473 PPro-D1S μένητε (abide) G3306 V-PSA-2P

If Jesus is reassuring them why does he say the same message twice the first time referring to anyone who is in the vine then reiterates specifically referring to the apostles themselves?

Remain in Me and I will remain in you as the branch is not able to bear fruit of itself if it doesn’t remain in the vine and neither can you if you don’t remain in Me.

I don’t see John 14:1-3 being conclusive.

I go on to prepare a place for you. If I go on and prepare a place for you I will come again and receive you into myself so that you may be where I am.

There’s two ways this can be interpreted. He said I’m going to prepare a place for you.

Then He said If I go and prepare a place for you I will return for you.

Him actually preparing the place for them can still be contingent upon abiding.

 

[redleghunter]

If Jesus is reassuring them why does he say the same message twice the first time referring to anyone who is in the vine then reiterates specifically referring to the apostles themselves?

Because you stop at verse 10 and don't include the entire passage. I know this is convenient for you trying to establish a pretext as truth. It fails...miserably when we apply the context.

Remain in Me and I will remain in you as the branch is not able to bear fruit of itself if it doesn’t remain in the vine and neither can you if you don’t remain in Me.

Yes AND:

“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." (John 15:11)

Not:

"These things I have spoken to you so that you may be scared, and in being scared of losing your salvation you abide in me."

See what happens when you stop at verse 10?

I don’t see John 14:1-3 being conclusive.

Was Jesus just giving them false assurance?

I go on to prepare a place for you. If I go on and prepare a place for you I will come again and receive you into myself so that you may be where I am.

There’s two ways this can be interpreted. He said I’m going to prepare a place for you.

Then He said If I go and prepare a place for you I will return for you.

That is exactly what Jesus said.

Him actually preparing the place for them can still be contingent upon abiding.

This is not what Jesus said. Reading into the text your pretext of loss of salvation you take a Ginsu knife to the Scriptures.

 

[BABerean2]

No one argues against these facts.


Again no one argues against these facts.

No one argued the Sinai covenant was still in effect. You persist at this but show me where someone actually made this argument and ping them as well.

Exo 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
(In the verse above we find that the 10 commandments written on stone are the Sinai Covenant.)

Deu 5:1 And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.
Deu 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
Deu 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
(The Sinai Covenant was not given earlier.)

Nowhere in scripture does Paul divide the Sinai Covenant into three parts.

Why are proponents of Reformed Covenant Theology asking their congregations to try to keep the 4th commandment?

.

 

[redleghunter]

Nowhere in scripture does Paul divide the Sinai Covenant into three parts.

No one here is doing that with Sinai either.

Why are proponents of Reformed Covenant Theology asking their congregations to try to keep the 4th commandment?

Sure you are not mixing us up with the Seventh Day Adventists?

Exo 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
(In the verse above we find that the 10 commandments written on stone are the Sinai Covenant.)

Yes first written down and in covenant with Israel who were set apart. Is it your point these laws did not exist prior to Sinai?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Because you stop at verse 10 and don't include the entire passage. I know this is convenient for you trying to establish a pretext as truth. It fails...miserably when we apply the context.


Yes AND:

“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." (John 15:11)

Not:

"These things I have spoken to you so that you may be scared, and in being scared of losing your salvation you abide in me."

See what happens when you stop at verse 10?


Was Jesus just giving them false assurance?


That is exactly what Jesus said.


This is not what Jesus said. Reading into the text your pretext of loss of salvation you take a Ginsu knife to the Scriptures.

These thing I have spoken to you so that you may have joy by being able to ask the Father for anything and receive it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Because you stop at verse 10 and don't include the entire passage. I know this is convenient for you trying to establish a pretext as truth. It fails...miserably when we apply the context.


Yes AND:

“These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." (John 15:11)

Not:

"These things I have spoken to you so that you may be scared, and in being scared of losing your salvation you abide in me."

See what happens when you stop at verse 10?


Was Jesus just giving them false assurance?


That is exactly what Jesus said.


This is not what Jesus said. Reading into the text your pretext of loss of salvation you take a Ginsu knife to the Scriptures.

Reading into the text is how you determine the context of what is being said.

 

[redleghunter]

Reading into the text is how you determine the context of what is being said.

Not reading in a theory.