Use of the aorist

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"And, are you going to explain WHEN you believe the gift of eternal life is given?"

Not at all dear friend.

I see. So then, it is clear that you don't know WHEN. Then you have NO RIGHT to make ANY claims about John 10:28 since you can't determine WHEN a person is given eternal life.

I agree with JESUS in John 10:26-28.

From your posts, you don't even understand what He said.

I disagree with you.

No, you disagree with Jesus. He said recipients of eternal life shall never perish. But since you believe that salvation can be lost, that means recipients CAN perish.

You are diametrically opposed to Jesus. How does that feel? I can't imagine.

As posted earlier, you disregarded the context of v28 which is v26-27 that define "they or them" .

Nonsense. I never have. v.27 is a description of what Jesus' sheep DO. And there is NO wording that makes what they DO a condition for becoming His sheep.

Besides, the focus on v.28 is WHEN Jesus gives them eternal life. And you don't know, or you would have answered with an explanation and a verse or 2 supporting your answer. So don't tell me what I'm disregarding. You are disregarding what Jesus said about recipients of eternal life.

As posted earlier and showing the context you left out the "they" or "them".

Jesus was speaking directly of His sheep. And they are believers, because of the plethora of verses that specifically say that eternal life and salvation are on the basis of believing in Christ.

In Jesus's own words "they" or "them" are those who hear His voice (the Word) and follow it *John 10:26-28. You can hand waive the scriptures, the context you have left out and the Greek in our discussion that all disagree with you all you like. Ignoring God's Word however does not make it disappear.

At this point, it DOESN'T MATTER WHO the "they" are. I totally disagree with your view, but that isn't the point here.

The ONLY POINT is WHEN Jesus gives the gift of eternal life to THEM.

And you don't even know that. So you have no basis for making ANY determination about v.28.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The entire comment was about the use of the future tense, not about believing! The future tense does not extend an ongoing action in the past (imperfect or perfect) or present tense past the present moment of writing. The future tense is about events happening at a certain point in the future, and it doesn't say anything about anything beyond that point, just like the aorist says nothing beyond the point of reference it's talking about, and just like the perfect says nothing beyond the present tense moment of the writer, and just like the present tense doesn't say anything about the action continuing or not. No tense says anything certain beyond the present tense!

Doug

Obviously. But you miss the simple point. Acts 16:31 teaches that from the MOMENT of belief in Christ (aorist), the believer WILL BE (future) saved.

This is a statement about WHEN salvation is realized. It is AFTER belief. That's the point.

 

[TibiasDad]

Knda getting tired having to keep explaining what is SO obvious. Belief of ANY kind is continuous. iow, when a believes something, they continuously believe it. Unless they are some kind of unstable psycho, who yo-yo's between belief and unbelief about whatever it is that they believe.

The point is that those who are children of God, and thus heirs of the promises, including eternal life, are always those who are presently believing! No one who is not believing presently is a child of God!

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"In John 3:18 it is a "perfect indicative active" in the negative. iow, they NEVER believed."

That's what you stated in post #113.

Here's the verse again:

NKJ John 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I also clearly addressed that I and others often disagree with English translations.

My only challenge to you at this time is to PROVE that "has not believed" CANNOT mean "has NEVER believed". It seems you are not up to the challenge.

My question is not about what English translations say. And we can note while here, that none of these several English translations say "NEVER" as you have [potentially] eisegeted for us in your post #113 quoted above. My question is about what the Greek parsing of the verb actually tells us.

Just look it up on biblehub.com and you'll see. The only challenge for you is to PROVE that "has not believed" CANNOT mean "has NEVER believed".

To be more clear, here's the Greek with that specific word in question highlighted:

BYZ John 3:18 Ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται· ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ (Jn. 3:18 BYZ)

So, you've told us that "In John 3:18 it is a "perfect indicative active" in the negative. iow, they NEVER believed." (italics & highlighting is mine).

Well, there you go. "they NEVER believed". Thanks. That is my point.

Now, since you made the claim re: the "perfect indicative active" meaning "Never", can you make your case re: "NEVER" from facts about the verb parsing, or can you not? If you don't understand my question, please feel free to tell me why, and I'll attempt to clarify it for you even better.

Just respond to my challenge.

Please feel free to utilize and present any credible Greek grammar reference you choose & please cite, link, or copy this reference for us, so we can review it.

Nope. Don't need to. But YOU need to prove my claim is wrong. Can you?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Amen, and amen! Watch FG2 will throw Wallace under the bus like he did Mounce in a previous thread!

Doug

No. Watch me lol about your faulty claims.

lol

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes, indeed! He has made a proposition, meaning he has to defend the meaning proposed. He has shifted the burden of proof and made the inability of negation the reasoning for his being correct! You would think that Mounce, being on the translation committee for the NIV, which translates according to the communicative meaning, more so than the literal lexical meaning, would have inserted the word "never" into the wording if that were the actual intent of the wording, if not the literal meaning!

Doug

How come none of you guys can PROVE my challenge wrong? Lots of word salads being thrown, but nothing substantial.

'has not believed' means 'has NEVER believd' and none of you can prove me wrong.

That's the only issue for all of you.

If the verses included some kind of time frame, like "recently" or something like that, you'd all have a point. But none of you have a point, since neither verse includes any kind of time frame for "has not believed".

Without a time frame context, "has not believed" absolutely DOES MEAN "has never believed" and you know it as well. But you're just not comfortable with that, because it really crushes your notions.

 

[TibiasDad]

Obviously. But you miss the simple point. Acts 16:31 teaches that from the MOMENT of belief in Christ (aorist), the believer WILL BE (future) saved.

This is a statement about WHEN salvation is realized. It is AFTER belief. That's the point.

Not just after--for indeed there is always a point of reference after, but whether it is actively ongoing! The "when" question of belief is irrelevant, for there is no necessity of a particular "when", the correct question is "what kind" active or inactive! It does matter if you used to believe, but if you believe, if you are believing in the present point of reference. As Wallace has astutely pointed out, active and ongoing belief is the standard expression of the biblical writers!

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Rom 8:17 mentions 2 inheritances. One is the inheritance of the child of God. That would be ENTRANCE into the kingdom. The other is the inheritance that is ONLY for those believers who "shared in His sufferings" or "endured". They will "reign with him" or "share in His glory", both obviously referring to the same thing; reward."

OK. Your opinion. So what?

Please reformat this post so that one can respond properly.

Doug

Either you are totally unfamiliar with both verses, or I don't know what.

Rom 8:17b and 2 Tim 2:12 are parallels. They teach the same thing. With me so far?

v.17b speaks of "sharing in His sufferings" while v.12a speaks of "enduring". They are the same thing. Still with me?

v.17b speaks of "sharing in His glory" while v.12a speaks of "reigning with Christ". They are the same thing. Got it?

 

[TibiasDad]

No. Watch me lol about your faulty claims.

lol

The road to destruction is filled with laughter!

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

One trick pony.

Actually, at times he/she makes me smile. Very quick & adept at nonsense & baiting to sidetrack & unnecessarily repeat. As I've stated before, appreciate the zeal but without knowledge. Actually a poor proponent for Free Grace in the end, but has digested the doctrine well.

This is hilarious. You haven't come close to proving any of your claims because you have NO verses that support your claims.

I have verses that plainly say what I claim.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Again, you state something not akin to what we argue! We do not argue for a "continuous present", we argue for continuous belief and obedience to Christ which means that we must always do so presently! (When else could it be done?)

Well, that was also my point. All belief is continuous present. It can't be otherwise.

Even Jesus made that clear with the 2nd soil in Luke 8:13. But He also added "for a while", proving that even PIA 'belief' doesn't last for some people. Now, did He indicate in that parable anything about losing salvation? No. Does ANY verse say plainly (do you understand what that means?) that one will lose salvation if they lose faith? No.

Or you 3 guys would have been shoving that verse down my throat by now.

So burn your strawman and start dealing with the actual arguments and evidence.

Poppy [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse].

You have been presented with powerful evidence from Greek scholars of unassailable reputation by posters far more skilled than myself, and I can only hope and pray that you would learn as much from them as I have.
Doug

Nothing posted by any of you or any scholar proves anything. The Greek is clear enough.

And you've got NO verse that says what you keep claiming.

 

[TibiasDad]

has not believed' means 'has NEVER believd' and none of you can prove me wrong.

That is your burden to prove, not mine (ours) to discredit. There is nothing, that I am aware of, in Greek grammar that necessitates the "never" qualification. If there is, please point us in that direction with specific and peer reviewed citations that establish such a claim. Until that happens, you are just voicing an opinion, and that blindly and without foundation!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Nothing posted by any of you or any scholar proves anything. The Greek is clear enough.

And you've got NO verse that says what you keep claiming.

Says the one without an hours worth of non-self-taught Greek training...

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

LUKE 8:11 states that they believed only "for a while", so "for a while" they were continually believing (PIA). The point is that they fell away when temptation came and departed the faith to become "unbelievers". This only supports what is being shared with you.

First, why do you keep mis-citing the verse? It's NOT v.11, but v.13 that is in view.

Second, there is NO word for "unbeliever" in that verse. So it is your own opinion that is getting in the way of your being able to understand what Jesus was teaching.

Jesus said they "fall away". The context is obviously refers to believing for a while. In fact, Jesus said nothing about losing salvation. That's just your opinion.

You are incorrect claiming that they will not come into condemnation, because after temptation came they were no longer believing, but had fallen away into unbelief therefore "unbelievers" and no longer believing in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Until you actually PROVE my claim about 'has not believed' is the same as 'has never believed' to be wrong, I'm not interested in any other discussion.

You know you can't prove that they are not the same.

If after temptation those who once believed are no longer believers then they are now "unbelievers" therefore the scriptures applied in JOHN 3:18 are applicable also to those who have departed the faith as they are now "unbelievers" not believing (PIA) in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Are you really that confused?? Let's take this slowly.

Jesus said they 'believed'. That makes them believers. We agree. Then Jesus said they believed 'for a while'. So after that they didn't believe. We agree, except your claim that they are back to "unbeliever" status is not accurate.

John 3:18 and 2 Thess 2:12 says condemnation is for those who "have not believed".

Now, the obvious question: Did soil #2 EVER believe? Yes. Even though they now have left the faith, they DID believe at one time.

And you really thing that "has not believed" doesn't apply to them? While they were not believing now, they DID believe then.

So it would be the height of absurdity to claim they 'have not believed', since they DID at one time.

The scriptures say no where here as you claim as long as you "once believe" even if you depart the faith to become an "unbeliever" you can still receive eternal life and there is no condemnation.

The 2 verses say that condemnation is for those who 'have not believed', and you cannot prove that the phrase doesn't mean 'have never believed'. So you have no point.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The point is that those who are children of God, and thus heirs of the promises, including eternal life, are always those who are presently believing!

Of course. That's not the issue.

No one who is not believing presently is a child of God!
Doug

And that claim has not been supported by Scripture. John 3:18 and 2 Thess 2:12 both say that condemnation is for those who "have not believed".

Did the second soil EVER believe? Yes, of course. Jesus SAID so. Luke 8:13.

Once Belief, No Condemnation. OBNC John 3;18 and 2 Thess 2:12

Which crushes your theology.

 

[FreeGrace2]

As Wallace has astutely pointed out, active and ongoing belief is the standard expression of the biblical writers!
Doug

When are you going to realize that this isn't the issue? And never was.

The single issue is WHEN one receives the gift of eternal life that Jesus gives.

Do you know when?

 

[TibiasDad]

v.17b speaks of "sharing in His sufferings" while v.12a speaks of "enduring". They are the same thing. Still with me?

Being related does not establish being equal or being " the same thing"! Yes, suffering needs to be endured, but suffering is not endurance! Yes, endurance is meaningless without something difficult to endure, but endurance is not the suffering that's being endured.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

When are you going to realize that this isn't the issue? And never was.

The single issue is WHEN one receives the gift of eternal life that Jesus gives.

Do you know when?

When they die and/or at the final judgement!

Doug

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"has not believed' means 'has NEVER believd' and none of you can prove me wrong."

That is your burden to prove, not mine (ours) to discredit.

Oh, yes it is. You're just dodging because you KNOW that you can't disprove it.

The reason is that my claim is OBVIOUS. If a person has NEVER believed, then that person "has not believed". That's how obvious all this is.

There is nothing, that I am aware of, in Greek grammar that necessitates the "never" qualification.

Still missing the whole point. This isn't about grammar. It's about WORDS.

When a person has NEVER believed, they "have not believed".

Once a person HAS believed, you cannot say they "have not believed", because they DID believe.

If there is, please point us in that direction with specific and peer reviewed citations that establish such a claim. Until that happens, you are just voicing an opinion, and that blindly and without foundation!

Doug

lol. Really? Is that your defense? Rather, you just can't disprove my claim, because it's true and so obvious, as I just demonstrated.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Says the one without an hours worth of non-self-taught Greek training...

Doug

Jealous?