Nang
TOL Subscriber
You commit the sins of bearing false witness and blaspheme God. May He show you grace and grant you repentance to turn away from such wickedness.
ECT Grace is unconditional but not universal
- Thread starter Nang
- Start date
- Status
You commit the sins of bearing false witness and blaspheme God. May He show you grace and grant you repentance to turn away from such wickedness.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
I do it constantly.
Then I tell them what it actually means in English from the Greek text rather than what everyone presupposes from all the binaries of false doctrine, including Arminianism versus Calvinism.
Cross Reference
New member
Well, did he or didn't Jesus for our sins? What's the hold up?
Matthew 23:37 states: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
How do Calvinists not see ANY free-will by the Jews in that verse of Scripture?
How do Calvinists not see ANY free-will by the Jews in that verse of Scripture?
And, you expect us to take your word for everything? Is that not true?
Sonnet
New member
That's good.
Jesus explained through analogy its meaning - that we are all 'snake-bitten' and need a 'cure' and have a 'bronze serpent' lifted up for us.
Nobody is excluded.
I'm still not clear what it is you believe, but if you can reconcile the two (theologies) then well and good.
As usual, you're wrong Nang.
I would like to see any poster on TOL try to sue me in a court of law. That would be a sight to behold and a frivolous court proceeding. :crackup:
I admit to standing against Calvinism and other false doctrines on TOL. Calvinism IS another gospel. It is not compatible with the teachings/preachings of the Apostle Paul. (The Apostle to the Gentiles) It goes against the character of God Himself and limits Christ's work on the cross to only a few "chosen Elect."
Christ died and was resurrected for the sins of ALL humanity. However, only those who hear the True Gospel and place ALL their faith in Christ as their Savior will reap the benefits. Those who reject the Grace of God through Christ are awaiting the judgment of God and eternal damnation. (The Lake of Fire)
We receive eternal life by hearing the Gospel and placing all of our faith in Christ and none in ourselves or anything else. Calvinism is, faith in something else.
Christ died and was resurrected for the sins of ALL humanity. However, only those who hear the True Gospel and place ALL their faith in Christ as their Savior will reap the benefits. Those who reject the Grace of God through Christ are awaiting the judgment of God and eternal damnation. (The Lake of Fire)
We receive eternal life by hearing the Gospel and placing all of our faith in Christ and none in ourselves or anything else. Calvinism is, faith in something else.
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
No, you just don't and can't understand the reconciliation when you see it and hear it.
Jesus Christ died for all sin. But Jesus Christ did not die for all sin.
The first above is singular anarthrous. The second above is singular articular.
English cannot and does not distinguish them, so it's vital to understand the Greek subtleties in English, which you refuse to do. (And Englishizers just turn the nouns into verbs anyway.)
Just because it's been reconciled doesn't mean you'll ever be able to recognize (RE-cognize) the reconciliation.
If you'd understand that it's about being accepted (HUGE lexical meaning in this Greek word that resolves the whole alleged conflict) in the beloved, you'd stop insisting that it's man that accepts Jesus Christ and you'd stop frustrating (HUGE lexical meaning here, too) grace and advocating for others to do so, too.
Quick closing question/s for you to ponder...
You insist man participates in the verb of believing, which is partially correct in an explicit context of being RECIPIENT. But what is faith, and whose faith is it?
As a noun, faith is "the thing believed", and it is an anarthrous form even when the article is added. Whose faith is it? The thing. Whose thing is it? Does it come from man as his innate thing (faith)? Or does it come from God by His Word (Rhema) as the thing?
The same question applies to the noun hearing as "the thing heard". Whose thing is heard? Man's thing or God's thing? And faith is the thing that comes OUT OF the thing heard. Whose thing is "the thing heard"? Whose thing is "the thing believed"?
If from God, and with verbs coming from the requisite nouns; then what source is the verb believing from... man's thing or God's thing? Where would man get faith (as the hypostasis of things hoped for) as his own thing? Or does that thing, too, come from God?
If it's man's faith, then you and your peers are correct. If it comes from God, then you are in gross error and preaching another Gospel (but there is no other, and you SURELY don't want me to break down that passage in Galatians and leave you cowering and further pontificating in denial and deliberate ignorance).
Romans 12:3
Wherein "measure" and "faith" are both anarthrous, not that it matters to anyone who's already made up their minds to think more highly of themselves than they ought, and their word trumps God's because they don't and can't know what Greek anarthrous nouns are and have replaced them with something else in their hearts and minds.
You guys enjoy your pointless debate and beating the air in ignorance of basic Greek nouns presented in English.
Thank you Professor Fussy. We should ONLY be taught by you, the world would be a better place.
PPS, why don't you start posting in the Greek language? That would be interesting.
PPS, you ought to write a book, using the Greek and Latin languages only? I'd even spring for a copy. However, you must sign my copy first.
Is it a deal PPS?
Hey, PPS, do you think people should be reading/studying the Bible without an original Greek and Hebrew translation book of sorts?
Sonnet
New member
Do you agree with this:
THE DEFINITE ARTICLE USED WITH NOUNS:
1. The ARTICULAR NOUN: When the definite article "the", IMMEDIATELY PRECEDES a NOUN, and it agrees with the NOUN in case number and gender, the NOUN is called an "ARTICULAR NOUN". The presence of the article marks CONTRAST, makes the noun stand out, and adds emphasis. The ARTICULAR NOUN also IDENTIFIES, or reveals identity. For example:
a. Titles in scripture are normally ARTICULAR NOUNS. Ho Theos (the God) and Ho Christos (the Jesus) are identifying God and Jesus as the one God of the Bible, (there are many God's), and Jesus the Son of God, the Savior. (Jesus was a common name among the Jews and many men were named Jesus).
b. In Romans chapter 6, Paul repeatedly places the definite article before the word "sin" (hamartia) indicating that he is not talking in this chapter about "a sin", some "amount" of sin, or "sinning" in general, but, THE SIN NATURE! He is contrasting our new nature and our old nature and urging us to live in the new nature!
http://www.biblefood.com/articthe2.html
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Nobody said anything about suing you or anyone else. I was referring to legal terms in terse dry humor, oh witless one.
Oh, I thought you were advocating that someone out to take me to court with a frivolous lawsuit? I should have checked what you posted with my Greek/Hebrew translations of what you meant before jumping the gun? My deepest apologies my equally "witless" friend.
Here I was getting ready to hire a defense lawyer. :rotfl:
- Status