Arminians' Dilemma

[meshak]

????? I'm not boasting about my IQ. I'm appealing to the authority of the great scholars and theologians that have come before me. Big difference. I am nothing without them.

How mpressive. You find the truth in men's wisdom, not from Jesus.

You see, your kind of faith make Jesus' simple gospel complicated. It is a grave sin to do that.

All denominational doctrines stem from your kind of faith which leads to chaotic Christianity.

Look at the mambo jumbo talk of this thread.

What you are doing is all about your ego, nothing esle.

 

[Samie]

No. You just presume that I did because you quoted my post before I edited it to clarify that man takes no INITIATIVE action for salvation. You don't, and can't, understand the vital importance of knowing the difference between Greek articular and anarthrous nouns. You have changed and added to the text, and without being able to know it.

Here's the text you said I changed and added to, that says Jesus will reward every man according to what he has done:

NIV Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. NIV Revelation 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.

Seems like you were not telling the truth in saying I changed and added to the text. What I posted is basically what the verse is saying.

Man takes no INITIATIVE action whatsoever.

And that's what I had been saying in this forum. The INITIATIVE comes from God through Christ that's why people are born In Christ, hence they are born spiritually alive. People don't believe to be In Christ; they already are In Christ. But Arminians say that people need to first believe to be In Christ. And that's why I say they have a dilemma, because they require whom they consider to be yet spiritually dead to first believe so that they can become spiritually alive. Is this rocket science you can't seem to understand what I mean?

You are a heretical Universal Atonement proponent and an Arminian to the point of being some degree of Pelagian.

That's why I say you don't understand my position. It's clear from Scriptures that Jesus died for all, for every man (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). How? Paul said a One New Man was created on the cross: Christ the Head, Humanity (Jews & Gentiles) the Body (Eph 2:11-19). There was yet no Ephesian nor Corinthian believer when Christ died, because it was Paul who preached Christ to them. But if only believers died with Christ, it follows that since there were no "believers" yet when He died, then no one died with Him and the One New Man has a Head but without a Body.

But No; the Body existed on the cross. It was in His Body that Christ carried humanity's sins (1 Pet 2:24), for He is the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the believers only? No, the sin of the world (John 1:29). That Body on the cross was us all - Jews and Gentiles - with all our sins. Having died with Him, we were likewise resurrected together with Him (Eph 2:4-6; Col 2:13), born again into a new hope of life eternal (1 Pet 1:3). Attached to the Head, the Body now has His Power to overcome evil with good (Phil 4:13; Rom 12:21). They now can believe to overcome the evil of disbelief and unbelief. They can now repent to overcome the evil of impenitence. And overcomers will not be blotted out from the book of life (Rev 3:5).

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Here's the text you said I changed and added to, that says Jesus will reward every man according to what he has done:

NIV Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. NIV Revelation 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.

Seems like you were not telling the truth in saying I changed and added to the text. What I posted is basically what the verse is saying.

And that's what I had been saying in this forum. The INITIATIVE comes from God through Christ that's why people are born In Christ, hence they are born spiritually alive. People don't believe to be In Christ; they already are In Christ. But Arminians say that people need to first believe to be In Christ. And that's why I say they have a dilemma, because they require whom they consider to be yet spiritually dead to first believe so that they can become spiritually alive. Is this rocket science you can't seem to understand what I mean?

That's why I say you don't understand my position. It's clear from Scriptures that Jesus died for all, for every man (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). How? Paul said a One New Man was created on the cross: Christ the Head, Humanity (Jews & Gentiles) the Body (Eph 2:11-19). There was yet no Ephesian nor Corinthian believer when Christ died, because it was Paul who preached Christ to them. But if only believers died with Christ, it follows that since there were no "believers" yet when He died, then no one died with Him and the One New Man has a Head but without a Body.

But No; the Body existed on the cross. It was in His Body that Christ carried humanity's sins (1 Pet 2:24), for He is the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the believers only? No, the sin of the world (John 1:29). That Body on the cross was us all - Jews and Gentiles - with all our sins. Having died with Him, we were likewise resurrected together with Him (Eph 2:4-6; Col 2:13), born again into a new hope of life eternal (1 Pet 1:3). Attached to the Head, the Body now has His Power to overcome evil with good (Phil 4:13; Rom 12:21). They now can believe to overcome the evil of disbelief and unbelief. They can now repent to overcome the evil of impenitence. And overcomers will not be blotted out from the book of life (Rev 3:5).

There's one heremeneutical context you don't understand, and you don't know how Greek noun forms affect English understanding.

This is why you presume to be right when you read the text. And you'll fight to the death for your conceptualizations. This is why every man's false autonomy can't be THE standard for truth and scriptural meaning.

We can't even converse because of your erroneous presuppositions and resulting deductions. THIS is why the modern Church-at-large is so jacked. The entire New Apostolic Reformation and Third Wave Charismaticism and Denominational False Ecumenism are apostate and have Trojan Horsed endless theological garbage within the body as seed of A word to grow tares among the wheat.

If you knew language nuances in translation, you'd be appalled at yourself and all others like you. Instead, you refuse to take heed and just continue on more beliegerent than when you started.

I think you ultimately have a heart for truth. What you don't realize is the damage you're doing to yourself and any others who agree with you or learn from you. You're accountable for that, just as others are accountable for the many similar things they have infused into the Body that is shades of untruth because of language fallacies.

Sad.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

What false concepts when I just quoted Jesus own words? He said He will reward every man when He returns. What's false with it?
Oh sorry. I should have used "from everlasting to everlasting" instead of "from eternity to eternity" since you take issue that the two phrases do not mean the same. But here's Scriptures:

KJV John 3:15-16 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 15 ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 16 Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ' ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Seems like eternal and everlasting are interchangeable since "eternal" in v15 and "everlasting" in v16 are both from the same Greek αἰώνιον, adjective normal accusative feminine singular no degree, from αἰώνιος. I'm just beginning to wonder whether you really are what you are claiming.

What you don't and can't realize is how much this magnifies and underscores everything I've said. You've said "seems like" eternal and everlasting are interchangeable. Yeah... It "seems like" that because of everything I've said. And your "seems like" is exactly what scripture means when referring to "there's a way that 'seems right' to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death".

You've emphasized my exact point about Greek anarthrous nouns (and their necessary anarthrous adjectives that modify them).

In John 3:15-16, aionios is rendered eternal rather than everlasting because it's an anarthrous adjective for an anarthrous noun; indicating the quality and character and activity OF that everlasting life coming from it's eternal source.

You can't innately have life that had no beginning, for you are created and had an inception. But God exhibited the greatest love when He laid down His life (psuche - soul life) for His friends. It is because God, in Christ, laid down the eternal inner qualities and characteristics and functional activity of HIS life, that we might be born from above for all everlasting.

It's the anarthrous noun and its adjective that reveals this, and you have once again presumed to change word meanings just because of your ignorant arrogant presumption from your autonomous English perspective from which anarthrous Greek nouns are changed by your own prerogative of false deductive reasoning of "seems like".

It's not me who you should be wondering about, but yourself. Adding to scripture by subtracting anarthrous nouns is the most monumental subtraction of meaning in the history of mankind; and you're complicit in your oblivious ignorance and fixation upon maintaining some idea that you've presented and/or resolved some alleged paradox about Arminians (and Calvinists, I suppose).

You're just wrong, and egregiously so. But you can't be taught or told, so go ahead a pollute the Body further with your nonsense. Nobody can stop you. You're autonomy is what modern culture is all about. Relativism.

Everybody can be right in their own eyes. But not God's.

I don't do this to be "the guy" or for arrogant condescension. I do this to rigorously defend the authentic and historical orthodox Christian faith from damage done WITHIN by well-meaning, but deluded, autonomists. This is the category you've put yourself in. And you can still hear truth and walk away from your fallacies. If you will.

 

[Aletheiophile]

How mpressive. You find the truth in men's wisdom, not from Jesus.

You see, your kind of faith make Jesus' simple gospel complicated. It is a grave sin to do that.

All denominational doctrines stem from your kind of faith which leads to chaotic Christianity.

Look at the mambo jumbo talk of this thread.

What you are doing is all about your ego, nothing esle.

I'm not going to deal with you. You cannot and will not be reasoned with.

 

[Aletheiophile]

Declaring that all humanity is in Christ denies the Gospel.

 

[Samie]

There's one heremeneutical context you don't understand, and you don't know how Greek noun forms affect English understanding.

This is why you presume to be right when you read the text. And you'll fight to the death for your conceptualizations. This is why every man's false autonomy can't be THE standard for truth and scriptural meaning.

We can't even converse because of your erroneous presuppositions and resulting deductions. THIS is why the modern Church-at-large is so jacked. The entire New Apostolic Reformation and Third Wave Charismaticism and Denominational False Ecumenism are apostate and have Trojan Horsed endless theological garbage within the body as seed of A word to grow tares among the wheat.

If you knew language nuances in translation, you'd be appalled at yourself and all others like you. Instead, you refuse to take heed and just continue on more beliegerent than when you started.

I think you ultimately have a heart for truth. What you don't realize is the damage you're doing to yourself and any others who agree with you or learn from you. You're accountable for that, just as others are accountable for the many similar things they have infused into the Body that is shades of untruth because of language fallacies.

Sad.

I don't think you are in a position to be so sure of yourself. Why? How could you be when in the simple matter of "eternal" and "everlasting" you were not even right.

But face the issue mentioned in my posts, squarely. Don't just answer with all your blah blah's. What in my position is not in accord with what the Bible says? Again, according to what the Bible says NOT according to what you want the Bible to say.

 

[Samie]

Declaring that all humanity is in[/in] Christ denies the Gospel.

According to you.

But God so loved the world (Jn 3:16). The Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:19). God is the Savior of all men (1 Tim 4:10). Jesus died for every man (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). Jesus came to give life to the world (Jn 6:33). Jesus came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15).

We can go on and on.

Your turn to show Scriptures.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I don't think you are in a position to be so sure of yourself. Why? How could you be when in the simple matter of "eternal" and "everlasting" you were not even right.

Really? Read the response to your ridiculously ignorant post about eternal and everlasting. And please note that you even accessed language tools and STILL had no idea why you were wrong. Maybe the Body has Teachers and leadership for a reason, so everyone isn't running around with infinite variations of theology because of their false autonomy and their English-tainted minds with diluted and conflated meanings for everything.

But face the issue mentioned in my posts, squarely. Don't just answer with all your blah blah's. What in my position is not in accord with what the Bible says? Again, according to what the Bible says NOT according to what you want the Bible to say.

I did. Read it above.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

According to you.

But God so loved the world (Jn 3:16). The Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:19). God is the Savior of all men (1 Tim 4:10). Jesus died for every man (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). Jesus came to give life to the world (Jn 6:33). Jesus came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15).

We can go on and on.

Your turn to show Scriptures.

It does no good to proof-text when on has no idea what words mean, beginning with anarthrous nouns and all they affect in every aspect.

 

[Samie]

In John 3:15-16, aionios is rendered eternal rather than everlasting because it's an anarthrous adjective for an anarthrous noun; indicating the quality and character and activity OF that everlasting life coming from it's eternal source.

Wrong again. Eternal in v15 and everlasting in v16 are both from aionios.

 

[Samie]

It does no good to proof-text when on has no idea what words mean, beginning with anarthrous nouns and all they affect in every aspect.

You are so enamored with your anarthrous invention. And who decides which is anarthrous and which is not? You?

That explains why you have to recourse to your anarthrous invention because you know you have no haven in Scriptures for your false theology.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

It does no good to proof-text when on has no idea what words mean, beginning with anarthrous nouns and all they affect in every aspect.

Bonus... Tell everyone exactly what it means to be "in" Christ.

You can't. At best, it will be some tedious descriptive nothing as an analogy or about the things we do, or whatever.

I can explicitly outline every last exegetical and lexical nuance to illustrate the ontology and birth Jesus Christ into Believers; because that's what I'm called and equipped to do. My language study was part of the preparation for that.

You cheapen the Gospel by pretending to know what you don't know, and insisting on "teaching" others some alleged truth that is merely based on a horrific surface conceptualized deduction of your own unrenewed mind of flesh.

Any Believer would have heard my words by now and been quickened to the heart. Please stop.

 

[Samie]

Bonus... Tell everyone exactly what it means to be "in" Christ.

You can't. At best, it will be some tedious descriptive nothing as an analogy or about the things we do, or whatever.

Then you did not even read my earlier posts. To be In Christ is simple even a first grader knows:

To be part of His Body.

 

[Samie]

Can you explain your theology as simple as I have done?

 

[Samie]

Then you did not even read my earlier posts. To be In Christ is simple even a first grader knows:

To be part of His Body.

Any objection? Spit it out. I will answer with Scriptures.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Wrong again. Eternal in v15 and everlasting in v16 are both from aionios.

And I told you exactly why. You still can't understand. English doesn't determine the meaning of Greek in arrears.

Aidios only appears in the inspired text in two places. Aionios is what is present everywhere else eternal or everlasting is rendered.

And this is huge area of general ignorance throughout Christian history. The difficulty in presenting the clear distinctions between eternal and everlasting. Much of that is because of individuals like you arguing in utter and abject ignorance about language with linguists.

Eternal is the quality and character and functional activity of the anarthrous form when applied to the noun aionios, which is everlasting.

Just because word meanings overlap, it doesn't mean they're interchangeable. You can stop being arrogant and presuming to know linguistics any time.

Why do people do this? You wouldn't go into a surgeon's office and start arguing about some subtle distinction in medical terms. You wouldn't do this to a computer programmer about a computer LANGUAGE. You wouldn't do this with very many technical fields and the expertise needed to know what most don't know who don't have the background and understanding, etc.

But no. Believers presume that they can know every nuance of meaning without being linguists, and solely deal with English. And then when they DO access some language tool, it's like they went into the operating room and grabbed the scalpel and started cutting without being a surgeon.

Seriously? Get over yourself. Theologians need to be linguists on some scale. Not all linguists are qualified theologians; but all theologians really need to be linguists.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Then you did not even read my earlier posts. To be In Christ is simple even a first grader knows:

To be part of His Body.

What does that even mean? You say these conceptual things that have no literal or figurative meaning.

And you're wrong. It's about hypostatic translation into Christ, and putting on His prosopon. You don't and can't know what that means.

But your ignorance not only doesn't stop you, it seems to fuel you. The "wronger" you are, the more you're determined to go on.

Stop already with your conceptualized nothingness. And no unbelievers are part of the Body of Christ, Universalist. If someone is IN Christ, they are saved to the uttermost. So now you made all mankind saved to the uttermost.

Universalism.

Can you explain your theology as simple as I have done?

I would never dare dumb-down and misrepresent the inspired text and the Gospel in such a manner as you presume to have done in your gross error. Don't drag me into that pit with you. You're there all by yourself.

 

[Aletheiophile]

According to you.

But God so loved the world (Jn 3:16). The Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world (Jn 1:19). God is the Savior of all men (1 Tim 4:10). Jesus died for every man (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). Jesus came to give life to the world (Jn 6:33). Jesus came to save sinners (1 Tim 1:15).

We can go on and on.

Your turn to show Scriptures.

Universally accessible does not mean universally applied.

Matt. 7:13 Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.
Christ is the narrow gate. He explicitly says that not all will enter.

Matt. 7:21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
"I never knew you," He says. Doesn't sound like all are in Him.

Matt. 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Hm, sounds like there's a distinction.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
From the mouth of Christ.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
That whoever believed shall not perish. There's a perishing for those unbelieving.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
Same sermon. Same message. Unbelief = perishing.

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
"To them which are in..." sounds pretty exclusive to me.

Romans 9:3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers,[a] my kinsmen according to the flesh.
If all men are in Christ, how would Paul being cut off from Christ accomplish anything? It signifies that there are those who are not in Christ.

Romans 9:8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.
Hm...even some of natural Israel are excluded.

Romans 9:22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
Why would there be different vessels if all are in Christ?

Romans 9:27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel[c] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28 for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.”
A Remnant. Doesn't sound like all or even a majority to me.

Romans 13:14 But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.
Hm...if all are in Christ, why would we have to put Him on?

1 Cor 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
Again, to them that are sanctified--That's a limiting phrase.

1 Cor 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Again, a group of people not in the Kingdom of God.

2 Thes 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.
Hm...Looks like a distinction there between damned and elect.

2 Thes 2:10 and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, 12 in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Paul is clearly delineating saved and damned -- those who love the truth and those who are deceived

All that you quoted from scripture is true. But He didn't die for acts of sin(s). That's not what hamartia means. He was made the quality/character/activity of the dysfunctionality of the sin condition. That's the universal condition. But the death is not universally applied. Accessible, but not applied.

The OT sacrifices only cleansed the sins of those in Israel, not outside. Foreigners had to enter Israel in order to receive the atonement.

 

[Samie]

So much for eternal and everlasting. You were already proven wrong. But you can assume you were the one correct. Be content with that.

Back to topic. Any objection that to be in Christ is to be part of His Body? I'm waiting...

If none, then you agree...