GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?  (Read 7708 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #140 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 07:31:04 »
....Cain who brought the fruit of his precious LABOR mixed with his heart filled with hatred toward the truth!
[/size]But of course any heart filled hatred Cain demonstrated toward the truth was, according to you and Reformed Theology (RT), is strictly due to God's failure to elect him.  Once again RT blames God.  How sick is that?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #140 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 07:31:04 »

Offline tooldtocare

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Manna: 2
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #141 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 09:23:16 »
(Jer 14:8 KJV)  O the hope of Israel, the saviour thereof in time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a stranger in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night?

(Ezek 36:17 KJV) Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their ..own way and by their doings: their way was before me as the uncleanness of a removed woman.

(Ezek 36:18 KJV) Wherefore I poured my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idols wherewith they had polluted it.

(Ezek 36:22 KJV) Therefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.

(Ezek 36:24 KJV) For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

note: the above happened in 1947ad

(Ezek 36:31 KJV) Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations.

(Ezek 36:32 KJV) Not for your sakes do I this, saith the Lord GOD, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel.

(Ezekiel 21:32 (ASV) Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; thou shalt be no more remembered: for I, Jehovah, have spoken it.

..According to a 2002 study by the Jewish Agency, "the number of Jews in the world is declining at an average of 50,000 per year."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_population

 ::reading::

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #141 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 09:23:16 »

Offline AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6185
  • Manna: 122
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #142 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 11:46:19 »
God wants faith and obedience from all, but He does not constrain people against their will to obey or remain disobedient.

Two famous instances in scripture show you to be incorrect:

1) Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh. Instead he ran away from God. Yet God found him and made him to do what He required from Jonah.
God did not let Jonah get away with what Jonah wanted. Jonah had no choice in the matter.

2) Saul wanted to kill Christians. That was Saul's will.
God wanted Saul on His side, so He struck him with blindness.


Both the examples above are instances where God constrained people against their will.
He interfered in their lives and made it well known to them that there was no escape from His plans for them.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #142 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 11:46:19 »

Offline bemark

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3676
  • Manna: 217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #143 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:00:43 »
Mark you are good brother, and very kind, to all. May God who is gracious above all be so to you and give your body some rest along with your mind. The Lord Jesus be with your spirit. RB
Thank you my friend. I did sleep a extra few hours than normal so your prayers helped and I feel much better.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #143 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:00:43 »

Ginger Rella

  • Guest
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #144 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:35:44 »
Well, if it makes sense that God wants all saved and that He wants all to repent, then I would think it makes sense that God wants these because He loves all. That is why He sent Jesus, according to John 3:16.

Yes, I believe God loved Pharaoh. Any condemnation of Pharaoh was Pharaoh's choice, not God's. There is rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents (Luke 15:10). Along with the other quoted passages, including Ezekiel 18:23 & 32, I can't believe otherwise about God. God wants all to repent and be saved, but each person has the choice to do so or not.

It is reasonable to believe that God wants all to repent and desires all to be saved. And each person has their individual  choice to do so or not.

But God cherry picked the Jews to separate them from the rest of the crowd.  WHY?

Yes, I am certain He would want ALL of His creation to be saved. After all, He made them/us. And he gave us free will. And the Holy Bible as our book of instruction. And Jesus. And by our free will we get to make the choice to follow Him or not.

I do not see Him equally loving  those who chose to follow other gods over Him the same way as He does those He handpicked, like the Jews, or those who chose Him by education or softness of heart, or understanding of our book of instructions. (i.e. Holy Bible)

I read Mark 4: 10-12 KJV 10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

And my current reading The Aramaic in plain English 4: 10-12.... 10But when they were by themselves, those twelve who were with him inquired of him about that parable. 11Yeshua said to them, "It has been given to you to know the secrets of the Kingdom of God, but to outsiders, everything has been in parables," 12"So that seeing they shall see and not see, and hearing they shall hear and they shall not understand, unless perhaps they shall be converted and their sins shall be forgiven them."

This has bothered me from the first time I have every read that. Partly because it says that God does not want all to be saved.... no matter His love for them.
And partly because I have had to struggle to study and comprehend these "parables" for my understanding because I believe if you do not understand... and not everyone is supposed to according to this.... but I must to be able to follow the handbook.(I have to do this for me)  (And you have been here long enough to know my concerns about myself)

I find it incomprehensible that He would equally love Osama Bin Laden, Adolph Hitler, and you the same way.

If  God truly wants all to be saved, why send Jesus to begin with? He is God all all could be saved just with his saying so. Even with free will, it could be inherently built into us the same as needing air to breath and  food for our sustenance and the fact that our mortal bodies will die.

I have known many who just assume that is the case..... and has nothing to do with God loving them or their love for God because these people do not even know God, much less love him.... they just assume they will be in a better place after life.



Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #144 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:35:44 »



Offline faroukfarouk

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1040
  • Manna: 8
  • John 3.16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #145 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:39:14 »
Two famous instances in scripture show you to be incorrect:

1) Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh. Instead he ran away from God. Yet God found him and made him to do what He required from Jonah.
God did not let Jonah get away with what Jonah wanted. Jonah had no choice in the matter.

2) Saul wanted to kill Christians. That was Saul's will.
God wanted Saul on His side, so He struck him with blindness.


Both the examples above are instances where God constrained people against their will.
He interfered in their lives and made it well known to them that there was no escape from His plans for them.
God worked out His purposes. As He still does

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #145 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:39:14 »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #146 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 12:54:54 »
Two famous instances in scripture show you to be incorrect:

1) Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh. Instead he ran away from God. Yet God found him and made him to do what He required from Jonah.
God did not let Jonah get away with what Jonah wanted. Jonah had no choice in the matter.

2) Saul wanted to kill Christians. That was Saul's will.
God wanted Saul on His side, so He struck him with blindness.


Both the examples above are instances where God constrained people against their will.
He interfered in their lives and made it well known to them that there was no escape from His plans for them.
God did/does indeed interfere in the temporal lives of mankind as he chooses. That is the message of Romans 9.  He does not do so in the spiritual lives of mankind.  In the case of Jonah, it doesn't speak about Jonah's spiritual standing before God.

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #147 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 13:42:22 »
But of course any heart filled hatred Cain demonstrated toward the truth was, according to you and Reformed Theology (RT), is strictly due to God's failure to elect him.  Once again RT blames God.  How sick is that?
Sir, ONCE AGAIN, that's your's and others perverted understanding of God's election of grace. Once again, blame Adam and Eve and all men who sinned in Adam AND when left to themselves hates the very God that gave ALL a PERFECT opportunity to obey God in a PERFECT setting, with ONLY one commandment to keep, and man disobeys and became at enmity against God. The burden is upon YOU and others to show where God is to be blamed. Is he to be blamed because of his own will and an act of pure grace whereas God purposes to save SOME and not ALL? This is TRULY what you and others hate and reject.  Sir, it is your corrupt doctrine that blames God for people ending up in the lake of fire, ultimately perishing~not the doctrine of grace, for God owes no man any act of mercy, not even the very least, for all deserve to be destroyed through their OWN disobedience and hatred of God, including you and I!
« Last Edit: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 13:53:42 by RB »

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4638
  • Manna: 214
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #148 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:04:25 »
Two famous instances in scripture show you to be incorrect:

1) Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh. Instead he ran away from God. Yet God found him and made him to do what He required from Jonah.
God did not let Jonah get away with what Jonah wanted. Jonah had no choice in the matter.

2) Saul wanted to kill Christians. That was Saul's will.
God wanted Saul on His side, so He struck him with blindness.


Both the examples above are instances where God constrained people against their will.
He interfered in their lives and made it well known to them that there was no escape from His plans for them.

Well, when we go back and read where the quote of mine you posted comes from, we can both agree that personal salvation with a view of either heaven or hell as a destination was the topic.

I had posted previous to this that the illustrations used in Romans 9 are not about how God selects people for their personal salvation, but rather to whom and how God chooses to work among nations and peoples according to His purposes, which purposes are ultimately for the good of His people. God knew Pharaoh would choose disobedience and so God chose to work through him to be glorified throughout the earth. Likewise, God chose Jacob to the rejection of Esau to work His will regarding Israel and ultimately the coming of the Messiah.

Both of the examples you posted are the same in that Jonah and Saul were chosen to serve certain purposes for the good of others, primarily His people, and for the glory of God. Even though Saul was saved, his salvation was not the primary reason for his being chosen (Acts 9:15-16).

When it comes to each person's salvation, I still maintain that God does not force His will but gives the choice to each one. Do you believe that the two examples you posted should be viewed as the normal when it comes to how God saves each person?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #148 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:04:25 »

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4638
  • Manna: 214
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #149 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:32:55 »
It is reasonable to believe that God wants all to repent and desires all to be saved. And each person has their individual  choice to do so or not.

But God cherry picked the Jews to separate them from the rest of the crowd.  WHY?


To bring the Messiah into the world for our salvation.

Quote

Yes, I am certain He would want ALL of His creation to be saved. After all, He made them/us. And he gave us free will. And the Holy Bible as our book of instruction. And Jesus. And by our free will we get to make the choice to follow Him or not.

I do not see Him equally loving  those who chose to follow other gods over Him the same way as He does those He handpicked, like the Jews, or those who chose Him by education or softness of heart, or understanding of our book of instructions. (i.e. Holy Bible)


Okay. I do believe God loves each one, including Pharaoh, Osama Bin Laden, Adolph Hitler, Ted Bundy, etc. Degrees of love don't have to be argued.

Quote

I read Mark 4: 10-12 KJV 10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.

11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

And my current reading The Aramaic in plain English 4: 10-12.... 10But when they were by themselves, those twelve who were with him inquired of him about that parable. 11Yeshua said to them, "It has been given to you to know the secrets of the Kingdom of God, but to outsiders, everything has been in parables," 12"So that seeing they shall see and not see, and hearing they shall hear and they shall not understand, unless perhaps they shall be converted and their sins shall be forgiven them."

This has bothered me from the first time I have every read that. Partly because it says that God does not want all to be saved.... no matter His love for them.
And partly because I have had to struggle to study and comprehend these "parables" for my understanding because I believe if you do not understand... and not everyone is supposed to according to this.... but I must to be able to follow the handbook.(I have to do this for me)  (And you have been here long enough to know my concerns about myself)


I believe the parables were used to make things easier to understand for any common person who wants to understand. Jesus didn't actually begin using parables until after He was accused by the rulers of doing His works by the power of the devil. There were those people who simply were not going to hear and believe. Again, those who choose lies and the evil ways are allowed to go on in their choices.

Don't you find it interesting that Jesus made such hard comments about those who would not understand, and then it turns out the disciples didn't understand? Jesus had to explain the parable of the soils (or, the sower) to them. This makes it clear to me that the reason for the lack of understanding matters. In the case of the disciples, it was an honest lack of clarity in their minds, but they had purer hearts. In the case of those Jesus castigated in verses 11 and 12, it was because they had already rejected the truth and had no desire for it.

Quote

I find it incomprehensible that He would equally love Osama Bin Laden, Adolph Hitler, and you the same way.

If  God truly wants all to be saved, why send Jesus to begin with? He is God all all could be saved just with his saying so. Even with free will, it could be inherently built into us the same as needing air to breath and  food for our sustenance and the fact that our mortal bodies will die.

I have known many who just assume that is the case..... and has nothing to do with God loving them or their love for God because these people do not even know God, much less love him.... they just assume they will be in a better place after life.

Jesus had to be sent as the perfect sacrifice for sins. There could be no atonement without His giving Himself on the cross, and there could be no life ever after for us without His resurrection. Regarding our freewill, I simply have to believe that God wants willing hearts, not those programmed or puppeted into compliance.

And, yes, there are plenty of people who have no clue about who God really is but assume that they will be among those in heaven. There are a lot of reasons why this is the case: our culture, the media, Hollywood, false teachers, our failure to get the truth out there, etc. The only thing I can think to do about it is to correct each person who I find has this assumption, and I try.

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #150 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:36:31 »
The Serpent SEDUCED Eve in a SEXUAL sense

2Cor. 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy:
        for I have espoused you to one husband,
        that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
2Cor. 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means,
        As the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty,
        so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

1John 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest,
        and the children OF THE DEVIL
        whosoever DOETH NOT righteousness is not OF God,
        neither he that loveth not his brother.
1John 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning,
        that we should love one another.
1John 3:12 Not as Cain, who was OF that wicked one, and slew his brother.
        And wherefore slew he him?
        Because HIS OWN WORKS WERE EVIL
        and his brother’s RIGHTEOUS.

1John 3:13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the WORLD hate you.

ABEL IS DEAD, CAIN WAS OF THAT WICKED ONE SO THAT.

THE CREATION LEADING TO MESSIAH BEGINS

Gen. 5:1This is the BOOK of the generations of Adam.
        In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen. 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them,
        and called THEIR name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen. 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years,
        and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image;
        and called his name Seth:

I DON'T SEE ANY HOPE FOR PEOPLE--IGNORING GOD'S WORD--CLAIM THAT HE CREATED EVIL PEOPLE WHEN SCRIPTURE SAYS THAT THEY ARE THE SEED OF THE DEVIL.

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #151 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:45:55 »
Quote from: Paul
Romans 9:7~"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called."
Neither indicates that two subject matters are under consideration, with the first already mentioned. Paul had stated a distinction to be observed within the nation of Israel~only part of it was elect. Now he will illustrate this point of God’s choice~unconditional election~in Abraham’s children. The Jews had a mind set that they were Abraham’s seed (Matthew 3:7-12; John 8:33-47), and they were in a limited and temporal sense~by flesh and nature only, so Paul by the Spirit illustrated by his immediate children. If the whole nation of Israel were to be saved by their relationship to Abraham, then all the sons of Abraham, eight in number, by three wives, should also all be his seed and heirs of great promises.

Because they are the seed of Abraham~We must be careful and rightly divide (2nd Timothy 2:15), for Paul used seed here for reprobates and then elect! Here in this phrase, Paul used seed to name Abraham’s biological, fleshly, first-generation children, but he will use the same word seed in the last clause of the verse for the elect child of promise. Reproductive generation by Abraham made any son his fleshly seed and child, but not God’s son; though Abraham had eight that were truly his seed and children, they were not the children of God. Great promises were made to Abraham about him and his seed when he was 75, though the heir of promise was not born for another 25 years (Gen 12:4,7; 17:17; 24:7; Rom 4:19; etc.).

Abraham had eight sons altogether, all which were his fleshly seed by reproductive generation. We know that, Abraham and Sarah used Hagar to help get the seed (Genesis 16:1-4,15-16; 17:15-21), but the result was a mere son named Ishmael that was later rejected with his mother (Genesis 21:8-14). Born after the energy of the flesh and rejected by God.

Note that even in Genesis 21:12-13 we have these two different senses of seed used by God, which provide another example of many of the importance of 2nd Timothy 2:15 and its KJV words.

Are they all children~Note that the Muslims claim to be descendants of Ishmael, who was rejected by Jehovah God. As the child of the flesh mocked the child of promise (Genesis 21:9), so it is in the N.T. (Galatians 4:29) ans even now!

Abraham married Keturah after Sarah died, who gave him six sons, whom he sent away to the east of Canaan and gave them minor gifts in compensation (Genesis 23:1-3; 25:1-6). All these eight children were the seed of Abraham, seven by concubines, of which Ishmael was the most noted in scripture and remains so today as the antagonist of the elect. Are they all children? If they are Abraham’s seed (or children), then they certainly are his children! Note Paul’s distinction between seed and seed, and children and children, just like Israel and Israel. The Lord Jesus Christ made a similar double use of words in John 8:37 (seed) and 8:39 (children). But the word children was used here for elect children, children of promise, and children of God. The next verse will clarify exactly what the Holy Spirit intended by the example~children of God. The definitions coming next are important, for those hating election make this national only. The issue here and throughout these chapters is not mere national blessings or privilege, or service, but rather salvation, for the context includes God’s compassion or hatred, eternal destruction, vessels of mercy for glory, gospel reception, relation to God’s kingdom, and related matters. Those claiming "national privileges" or "earthly services" as the issues are lying or ignorant, or both, since (a) the whole argument is refuting any birth or national advantage with God, (b) the "the children of God" are plainly stated, (c) the following context of 9:22-24 will further confirm eternal life, and (d) the resulting Jew-Gentile multitude for eternal blessings is without racial or national distinction.

Note the mess that results from seeking children of God by fleshly means, just as the Arminians do with their manmade, free-will doctrine of synergistic regeneration (Abraham and Hagar)! First, the ideas generated by modern evangelistic thinking for saving the lost are perverse and worldly, just as Abraham sleeping with Sarah’s servant woman while Sarah crocheted outside! Second, the results stink, for carnal means of modern Christians cannot regenerate any, as the results of Finney’s preaching, Graham’s crusades, youth rallies, etc. all show~ which is identical to the rejected fruit of Hagar’s and Keturah’s wombs, producing nothing spiritual.

Third, the numerous results, seeming so effortless and efficient, lead to arrogant despite and persecution of the truth and its followers, just as with Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 16:4-5; 21:9) and as we see now.  Fourth, even Abraham and Sarah, the ministers of God, were impotent to help (Romans 4:19).  Fifth, we trust God’s promise and power without question to produce God’s sons (Romans 4:20-21). Sixth, though nearly foolish to suggest, Isaac could not help himself at all become the child....or, have I missed something? NO I have not, others have!   If you think this metaphorical side lesson is going too far, read and consider Galatians 4:21-31. Then tell me WHY you still think so, but I do not expect any takers.

But~ It did not matter that Abraham begged for Ishmael to be it, God had rejected him (Genesis 17:18-19).

In Isaac shall thy seed be called~ God declared that Abraham would father a son by Sarah to be named Isaac. It did not matter what Abraham did with Hagar or Keturah; the son God loved and would bless with spiritual blessings infinitely greater than Ishmael or the others was Isaac, and only Isaac. Abraham’s seed, as far as earth was considered came through Isaac, as far as heaven, Jesus Christ. God’s blessing progressed from Abram to others, even Gentiles, by Isaac and Christ (Gal 3:16)~and in the SAME MANNER, BY GOD'S PROMISES and OATH!


Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #152 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:50:26 »
Okay. I do believe God loves each one, including Pharaoh, Osama Bin Laden, Adolph Hitler, Ted Bundy, etc. Degrees of love don't have to be argued.
You know why? God loves his children THE SAME, EQUALLY~to the same degree that he loved his Son! To believe otherwise only shows one's lack of understanding of God, and the gospel of Jesus Christ, God views his children as ONE with his Son, members of HIS spiritual body, Christ being the head thereof.

God does not love all men without exception, that's a perversion of the word of God. He DOES love all men without DISTINCTION, Jews, Gentiles, bond and free, rich and poor, the strong and the weak and feebleminded etc. BUT, mostly poor, and the world's nobodies!
« Last Edit: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 14:55:01 by RB »

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #153 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 15:33:28 »
Quote
Neither indicates that two subject matters are under consideration, with the first already mentioned. Paul had stated a distinction to be observed within the nation of Israel~only part of it was elect. Now he will illustrate this point of God’s choice~unconditional election~in Abraham’s children.

I shiver for people who quote isolated verses and then fill in chapters: it has been shown over and over that:

The Jews believed that they were PREDESTINED and the Gentiles were excluded.
Paul shows that Jacob is an ALLEGORY to show that those who walk by THE FAITH are accepted and not those who KEEP THE LAW which was added because of transgression and NOT to show favor.

Sarah understood that TWO NATIONS were in her womb and had nothing to do with personal salvation:.  Let's try again.

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.
Gal. 4:25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia,
         and answereth to Jerusalem [SODOM]
         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 MEANING OF IS IS THAT THIS IS A CONTRAST BETWEEN THE LAW OF MOSES AND THE SPIRITUAL COVENANT MADE WITH ABRAHAM PROPHESYING THE CHRISTIAN SYSTEM.

PRAY THAT GOD WILL PERMIT YOU TO READ THE TEXT IN CONTEXT AND GIVE GLORY TO GOD.
« Last Edit: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 15:35:51 by Kenneth Sublett »

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #154 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 16:09:36 »
Sarah understood that TWO NATIONS were in her womb and had nothing to do with personal salvation:. Let's try again.
Yes, please try again, for you have err with this:
Quote from: Kenneth Sublett Reply #153 on: Today at 15:33:28
Sarah understood that TWO NATIONS were in her womb and had nothing to do with personal salvation:.
You made two errors, the first one, not that bad~it was Rebecca, not Sarah that had the twins, Esau and Jacob. Your second error was a perversion of the scriptures~What was said to Rebecca had EVERYTHING to do with SALVATION per Paul from Romans 9:10,11 ....where it is said: "That the PURPOSE of God according to ELECTION OF GRACE might stand NOT OR WORKS, but of him that calleth." Yes "of grace" is not mentioned here but IS mentioned in Romans 11:5,6 where this whole discourse continue!

Now did Sarah have twins? or Rebecca? If salvation is not the doctrine taught here then pray to tell me what is?
« Last Edit: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 16:12:04 by RB »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #155 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 17:35:25 »
If salvation is not the doctrine taught here then pray to tell me what is?
What is being taught here is NOT salvation; rather, what is being taught here is the creation, the forming, the instituting of ethnic Israel, the children of the flesh....  who are Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen (Romans 9:4-5).

We know this because Paul almost immediately designates the distinction between the children of the flesh who are also children of the promise, I.e., For they are not all Israel, that are of Israel: neither, because they are Abraham's seed, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, it is not the children of the flesh that are children of God; but the children of the promise are reckoned for a seed (vv 6,7,8).   The descendants of Jacob, all the descendants of Jacob, constitute ethnic Israel; they are all Israelites.  They all constitute the selected, chosen, people to serve God's purpose  -- iin order that God's purpose of election might continue(v.11)   Clearly here, in the designation of Esau and Jacob, Paul is not speaking of the individual brothers personally, but rather the nations which resulted from the twins. 

How this applies to the issue under discussion should be clear.  At stake is God's faithfulness in his dealings with the Jews.  How could He shower them with the covenant blessings of verses 4 and 5 and allow them to be lost at the same time?  The answer is that the covenant did not include a promise of individual salvation for all Jews; rather it was limit to God's special use of the nation of Israel as the conduit for bringing Christ into the world. From the beginning God determined that He was going to do this, regardless of whether any individual Jews were saved.  Just as "God's purpose in election" did not depend upon the spiritual status of the twin He chose from Rebekah's womb, so also it did not depend upon the salvation status of the Jews in Paul's day.  The election here is not about individual salvation; rather it is about the means through which Christ would be brought to the world.  So that the failure of any individual Jew to be saved is not a failure of God's promises.

Offline AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6185
  • Manna: 122
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #156 on: Sun Aug 05, 2018 - 23:56:31 »
I find it incomprehensible that He would equally love Osama Bin Laden, Adolph Hitler, and you the same way.

That depends on how lovable you think you are in comparison to Bin Laden and Hitler.
Yes according to our human point of view there is a massive difference between Hitler and "normal" people, however how large do you think the difference is when God looks at both?

RC Sproul used to explain it as follows:
He picked 3 people from the audience and brought them on stage.
One person he put all the way at one end of the stage: that's where God is.
And the other person he put all the way at the other end of the stage: that's where Satan is.

He then ask the other person: If you would to estimate how holy you are, where would you go and stand?
Right in the middle, or near to God or near to Satan?


What RC Sproul of course wanted to say is that from God's viewpoint there is very little difference between Hitler, you and I.
We humans think we are much better that Hitler or Bin Laden, whilst the fact is we are not.
As far as God is concerned, we are all at the other side of the stage.

So the real matter is that it is incomprehensible that God can love me, even though I am just like Bin Laden and Hitler.

Offline AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6185
  • Manna: 122
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #157 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 00:37:03 »
Well, when we go back and read where the quote of mine you posted comes from, we can both agree that personal salvation with a view of either heaven or hell as a destination was the topic.

I had posted previous to this that the illustrations used in Romans 9 are not about how God selects people for their personal salvation, but rather to whom and how God chooses to work among nations and peoples according to His purposes, which purposes are ultimately for the good of His people. God knew Pharaoh would choose disobedience and so God chose to work through him to be glorified throughout the earth. Likewise, God chose Jacob to the rejection of Esau to work His will regarding Israel and ultimately the coming of the Messiah.

Both of the examples you posted are the same in that Jonah and Saul were chosen to serve certain purposes for the good of others, primarily His people, and for the glory of God. Even though Saul was saved, his salvation was not the primary reason for his being chosen (Acts 9:15-16).

When it comes to each person's salvation, I still maintain that God does not force His will but gives the choice to each one. Do you believe that the two examples you posted should be viewed as the normal when it comes to how God saves each person?

Soterion,

Your statement was: "God wants faith and obedience from all, but He does not constrain people against their will to obey or remain disobedient."

I have given you 2 instances from scripture that show you that your statement is incorrect. In both Paul's and Jonah's case, God did directly interfere with their lives and He did constrain them against their will.

The rest of your post is something else. But also here we know that God selects and elects people, either on a personal basis or on a cumulative basis.
So now I am going to argue from your point of view, which is that the path to salvation starts with a personal choice.

The first thing that needs to happen then is that people are actually given a choice, and a choice by freewill must be made.
So how do you deal with all the people in history past who were not given the choice?

Jesus appeared on the scene some 2000 years ago in Israel.
That's when the opportunity to choose arose.
But how about people who lived in the same time in for example Britain or Europe? They didn't know Jesus or the gospel, so how could they choose?
How about people in the American continent? They came to learn about the gospel many centuries later.
How do you expect people to make personal choices if they are placed in a society that is not granted the opportunity to choose?

What you see here is that God's sovereignty is at work and has always been at work throughout the ages.
God elected the Jews to bring His plan to pass. And concerning all other nations He did not choose, it is really up to God to deal with as He sees fit.
If He so chooses to condemn them, what is that to you? Can He?....yes! Is God entitled to?...sure!

People who argue like you are way to concerned with the fate of those who did not hear the gospel.
You try to find a way to get God "off the hook", as if there is something unfair if God decides to condemn people by their own merits.

Who says God needs to present people equal opportunities? Who says God cannot pick who He wants to save?
Look around you. Do you see everybody being given equal opportunities?

Here is the thing: God MUST interfere in each and everyone's life in order to bring salvation.
Without God being a compelling element in our life, we are doomed!

This is not a simple matter of making a choice, it is a matter of God actively molding us to be regenerated in order to understand.
God has already molded you and prepared you long before you were able to receive the gospel.

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #158 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 04:51:54 »
What is being taught here is NOT salvation
We shall see as we work our way through every word of Romans 9 up until verse 24.
Quote from: 4WD Reply #155 on: Yesterday at 17:35:25
rather, what is being taught here is the creation, the forming, the instituting of ethnic Israel, the children of the flesh....
Respectfully disagree, let Paul tell us why he mentioned Israel after flesh:
Quote from: Paul
Romans 9:1-3~I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:
Not accursed legally for no man can love ABOVE the requirement of the law, which commands us to love others AS OUR SELVES~yet, Paul knew that many of his brethren after the flesh though regenerated yet did not enjoy the full blessings under the New Covenant of KNOWING that Christ is the END of the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS to every one that believeth in him. Many Jews, though NOT a castaway, yet STUMBLED at THAT stumbling stone believing that RIGHTEOUSNESS came by the works of the law and NOT by the system of faith. Paul's prayer to God and his great heaviness and sorrow in his heart was that Israel might get SAVED, NOT in a regenerating sense but PRACTICAL of coming to a TRUE understanding of the truth and based upon this, Paul was willing to LOSE HIS PRACTICAL SALVATION so that they would enjoy what he had IN CHRIST. MUCH like you and others here, who DO BELEIVE in GOD, yet fight against the SYSTEM OF FAITH "ONLY" that God has placed all of his children under, whereby we come unto the knowledge of our free justification IN Christ without the works of the law.

Now by me saying all this, I just lost some of them who have been understanding some of what I have been saying, but I took it a step further and most likely lost them. But I have done this very slowly so as not to lose them. I know how easy it is to get confused, I have been there trying to come unto the knowledge of the truth...it takes TIME sometimes YEARS.

The very people Paul war against were SOME OF THEM TRUE children of God, just they have been stumbling at THAT stumbling stone of thinking that they MUST do this, or that before they are accepted by God, when the TRUTH IS that Christ secured our righteousness to have eternal life by his own obedience.

Chapter nine from verse 25 to Romans 11:36 will slowly unveil this truth~it is NOT easy to see, and certainly not for a novice to teach others.

Many people cannot see that a person truly may be a child of God yet are fighting against truth and not understanding it~We should follow Paul's example and look for certain traces of a person who may be born again, yet not understanding some precious truths that could liberate his soul from a system of works and that would allow him to give God all the glory and allow him to rest in peace knowing that our salvation from sin and condemnation has been SECURED by God's faithfulness promises through Christ.

The reason why Paul had sorrow in his heart and still was praying to God for those among Israel he tells us here:
Quote from: Paul
Romans 10:1-3~"Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. FOR I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."
4WD and others here, these words either fit YOU or ME, both of us have a zeal of God, BOTH believe yet one of us are ignorant of the righteousness of God, and HOW this righteousness is obtained.  I say that CHRIST is the END OF THE LAW (works of any kind) for righteousness to everyone that believe ONLY without ANY ADDITIONAL WORKS!

What saith thou? My hearts desire for you and others is that you might be saved to this blessed knowledge. I care less about people who have no love for the scriptures, Jesus Christ, yet DO CARE for those who do, yet may be in error. For so did Paul~that's why he went to the synagogues and where prayer was being held~he wasted NO time on others and neither shall I. SELAH.
« Last Edit: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 04:56:34 by RB »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #159 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 06:21:53 »
Honestly RB, you and that "practical salvation" that you talk about all the time.  It is a false construct.  It is nonsense.  It is not Biblical.  It is a false construct to get around the false teachings of total depravity, unconditional election and limited atonement  --  each and every one of them an affront to God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

I am speaking the truth in Christ--I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit-- that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh.


Paul is in agony.  Why?  Because they were lost.  Those of his kinsmen who did not believer were accursed.  They were the unbelieving Jews. He often spoke of them as his brothers (Acts 13:26,38; 22:1,5; 23:1,5,6).  His concern for them was so great that he wished that he could give himself and take their place.  He wished he could be accursed and cut off from Christ for their sake.  Accursed and cut off from Christ  --  there is nothing of a "practical salvation" about that.  It is condemnation. He would accept condemnation of himself to be able to save them.  Of course that was not possible.  Jesus had done just that very thing and they rejected Him.
[quote author =RB]Not accursed legally[/quote] Nonsense. Paul said "accursed and cut off from Christ".  That is what they were and that is what Paul said that he wished he could take their place instead  --  "For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers"  Cut off from Christ; it doesn't get more legal than that.
 
Quote from: rb
I say that CHRIST is the END OF THE LAW (works of any kind) for righteousness to everyone that believe ONLY without ANY ADDITIONAL WORKS!
  Additional works??  Additional works??  Are you really suggesting that believing is works.  Believing is certainly doing something.  But then so is repenting, confessing and submitting to being baptized. No more so nor no less so than believing.  But in no case are those doings, the doing of believing, of repenting, of confessing of submitting to being baptized works of law that Paul spoke against as a way of salvation.
Quote from: RB
Paul knew that many of his brethren after the flesh though regenerated yet did not enjoy the full blessings under the New Covenant....
Regenerated yet not enjoying the full blessings??  Where in the world do you get that.  Paul never once hinted of such a ridiculous situation. Quite the opposite (Titus 3:5).  Regenerated --  saved.

What can I say?  There was some really serious and dreadful eisegesis in all of that.  But again, once you buy into the false notion of total depravity, there is no end to the eisegesis needed to get around it.  Having bought into the theological detritus of the perception that God forms in mankind a spirit dead in Adam's sin and then doesn't bother to even do anything about it for most men, it does take a lot of tweaking and rewriting of the Scriptures to rationalize it.
« Last Edit: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 06:24:35 by 4WD »

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4638
  • Manna: 214
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #160 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 08:37:03 »

The rest of your post is something else. But also here we know that God selects and elects people, either on a personal basis or on a cumulative basis.
So now I am going to argue from your point of view, which is that the path to salvation starts with a personal choice.

The first thing that needs to happen then is that people are actually given a choice, and a choice by freewill must be made.
So how do you deal with all the people in history past who were not given the choice?

Jesus appeared on the scene some 2000 years ago in Israel.
That's when the opportunity to choose arose.
But how about people who lived in the same time in for example Britain or Europe? They didn't know Jesus or the gospel, so how could they choose?
How about people in the American continent? They came to learn about the gospel many centuries later.
How do you expect people to make personal choices if they are placed in a society that is not granted the opportunity to choose?

What you see here is that God's sovereignty is at work and has always been at work throughout the ages.
God elected the Jews to bring His plan to pass. And concerning all other nations He did not choose, it is really up to God to deal with as He sees fit.
If He so chooses to condemn them, what is that to you? Can He?....yes! Is God entitled to?...sure!

People who argue like you are way to concerned with the fate of those who did not hear the gospel.
You try to find a way to get God "off the hook", as if there is something unfair if God decides to condemn people by their own merits.

Who says God needs to present people equal opportunities? Who says God cannot pick who He wants to save?
Look around you. Do you see everybody being given equal opportunities?

Here is the thing: God MUST interfere in each and everyone's life in order to bring salvation.
Without God being a compelling element in our life, we are doomed!

This is not a simple matter of making a choice, it is a matter of God actively molding us to be regenerated in order to understand.
God has already molded you and prepared you long before you were able to receive the gospel.

So, it is only through the gospel that people have had the choice regarding salvation, and not before?

In Romans 1:18-20 we read that God has revealed Himself in the creation and that men are without excuse for not glorifying Him as such. In Romans 2:12-16 we read that people will be held accountable to what was revealed to them, either in their hearts or by means of the written Law. It helps here to read Romans 5:13. Sin is not imputed where there is no law. Therefore, death is not found where there is no lawbreaking. However, in verse 14, Paul writes that death reigned from Adam until Moses. This means there was law of some kind, and it was being broken.

Of course, God is going to work in people's lives for their/our good. He works His will providentially to save as many as will believe. In all of it, the freewill of the individual is not taken away when it comes to each person's receiving salvation or not.

Offline faroukfarouk

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1040
  • Manna: 8
  • John 3.16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #161 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 09:40:18 »
"He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" (Daniel 4.35)

Offline AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6185
  • Manna: 122
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #162 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 10:11:16 »
So, it is only through the gospel that people have had the choice regarding salvation, and not before?

Of course it is ONLY through the gospel that we can be saved.
Unless you are of the opinion that Jesus' death was not necessary for salvation?

Offline faroukfarouk

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1040
  • Manna: 8
  • John 3.16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #163 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 10:12:37 »
Of course it is ONLY through the gospel that we can be saved.
Unless you are of the opinion that Jesus' death was not necessary for salvation?
Good to remember John 14.6.

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4638
  • Manna: 214
  • Gender: Male
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #164 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 18:46:19 »
Of course it is ONLY through the gospel that we can be saved.
Unless you are of the opinion that Jesus' death was not necessary for salvation?

I should have remembered. I recall past discussions I have seen you in where you take people's words out of their context in their post and strawman the poster.

You've done that twice now just in this discussion. No thanks. ::frustrated::

Offline AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6185
  • Manna: 122
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #165 on: Mon Aug 06, 2018 - 23:57:43 »
I should have remembered. I recall past discussions I have seen you in where you take people's words out of their context in their post and strawman the poster.

You've done that twice now just in this discussion. No thanks. ::frustrated::

I re-read my responses in this thread.
I neither see me taking anything out of context, nor do I see me setting up a strawman.

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #166 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 03:55:10 »
So the real matter is that it is incomprehensible that God can love me, even though I am just like Bin Laden and Hitler.
That God SO LOVED the world (Jews AND GENTILES) that he made his Son to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God through Jesus Christ's righteousness. Yes, we by nature are no different than the vilest of sinners, IF left to ourselves. Even after being born of God, that vile old man is still with us~called the body OF SIN and death.
Quote from: AVZ  Reply #165 on: Yesterday at 23:57:43
I re-read my responses in this thread. I neither see me taking anything out of context, nor do I see me setting up a strawman.
Much more on their part than with you~with you, a sincere person still laboring to put the truth together and THAT'S OKAY we all are on different levels of understanding~at least you are honest in presenting your understanding with what knowledge God has been pleased to impart to you in this stage of your life as a believer.
Quote from: AVZ Reply #162 on: Yesterday at 10:11:16
Of course it is ONLY through the gospel that we can be saved.
In this sense is this so~we are born of God apart from the gospel by the Spirit of the Living God. A man by nature is dead in trespasses and sins~one must be given LIFE before one can hear, see, and process the information that he is hearing in order to believe. Any rational person with some understanding should understand this simple truth. AGAIN, as I mentioned above and a few posts back that the gospel DOES NOT give spiritual life to the dead sinner who is by nature at enmity against the God of the gospel concerning His Son, Jesus Christ. Listen to the Apostle Paul, the greatest defender of the testimony of God concerning his Son:
Quote from: Paul
2nd Timothy 1:8,9~"Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:"
The gospel bring to LIGHT  where there is LIFE, and it will also manifest where death STILL reigns! Again, as I said above, the gospel can ONLY be revealed FROM a person who has faith TO another person WHO HAS FAITH per Paul:
Quote from: Paul
Romans 1:16,17~"For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith."
The gospel is the power of God to BELIEVERS ONLY the reason being "for" THEREIN is God's righteousness revealed FROM faith TO faith! and then Paul added THE JUST shall live by faith, meaning if a person can receive the gospel, then they can do so ONLY by faith which is the FRUIT of the INDWELLING Spirit proving that that person is ALREADY JUST! The gospel preached to the lost who do not possess the gift of faith secured by Jesus Christ is nothing more than FOOLISHNESS to that person per Paul:
Quote from: Paul
1st Corinthians 1:18~"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
Foolishess to them that perish, but unto them that ARE SAVED (used in the sense of being born again) the gospel is the power and wisdom of God how he provided for his people, his righteousness through his Son's perfect life of obedience, and him offering THAT LIFE for our sins, giving to us the righteousness of God to OUR ACCOUNT as though WE HAD DONE IT.
Quote
1st Corinthians 1:21~"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."
This salvation in verse 21 is used in a different sense than the word saved is used in verse 18! Here it is used in the SAME sense as Romans 1:16~the gospel save us unto the KNOWLEDGE of the truth, concerning God's elect coming unto the blessed knowledge that Jesus Christ alone secured the righteousness of God for us, in order for us to have the FREE GIFT of eternal in the world to come. Eternal life is having God's perfect righteousness, which no man is capable of having since all men have sinned and come short of the glory of God..... which is PERFECT RIGHTEOUSNESS~there was ONE person who lived in the flesh who was separate from sinners from conception to death in thought, word, and in deeds~JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God~and all that where given to him to redeemed who were members of his spiritual, elect body, LIVED, DIED and AROSE with him and are NOW seated in the heavenly with him, posses the same life that he now has~WORLD WITHOUT END!
« Last Edit: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 04:07:18 by RB »

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #167 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 04:36:19 »
Quote from: Paul
Romans 9:8~ That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
That is~These precious words are the Holy Spirit indicating He will explain and interpret the topic at hand. Though eight were Abram’s fleshly seed and children, only Isaac was the true seed and son of God. Paul had more than just Isaac and Ishmael at stake here~there was the election in present Israel. They which are the children of the flesh.

Human efforts, not matter how well intentioned or applied, can never substitute for a divine work of grace~they will only result in a fleshly outcome that will bring and cause further trouble. Abraham and Hagar and Abraham and Keturah only produced children of the flesh, mere boys. Remember Paul’s original argument, not all of national Israel is elect, so that we may see clearly enough that Paul ruled out any racial or national basis, even for Jews, God’s favor in salvation. It did not matter anymore to be of Abraham’s stock in Paul’s day than it did to be of Hagar or Keturah’s in Abraham’s day, which was a devastating blow to Jewish fables (Galatians 4:21-31).  John blew away all confidence in the flesh by rejecting any fleshly help for regeneration (John 1:13). Jesus blew away the same false confidence in the flesh in (John 3:6-8).

These are not the children of God~No matter some may look like children of God, think they are the children of God, some senses of the terminology of children of God may apply, or others preach that they are the children of God… only the ones God identifies as such are truly His children. The issue here and throughout these chapters (9-11) is not national blessings or privilege, but rather salvation, for the context includes God’s compassion or hatred, eternal destruction, vessels of mercy for glory, gospel reception, relationship to God’s kingdom, and related matters.

Those claiming "national privileges" as the issue are lying or ignorant, or both, since (a) the whole argument is refuting any birth or national advantage with God, (b) the "the children of God" are plainly stated, (c) the following context of 9:22-24 will further confirm eternal life, and (d) the resulting Jew-Gentile multitude for eternal blessings is without racial or national distinction.

But "the children of the promise"~God promised a seed to Abraham that He knew He would bring from Sarah’s womb (Gen 15:1-4), though He did not do so before her menopause, and though they foolishly used Hagar (16:1-4). God promised this seed to Abraham first, though Abraham did not believe him (Genesis 17:15-19). Also, God promised this seed to Abraham in Sarah’s hearing, and she did not believe (Genesis 18:9-15). Abraham soon believed, and his faith in God’s promise and power is precious (Rom 4:17-22). When God promises to do something by His power, human means are quite irrelevant, thus our dependence on holy scripture to know or believe anything, for all depends on His power. The promise was God’s powerful operation (I will come) and by His means (infertile Sarah). There is more than just Isaac considered here, for we have the plural children rather than child. Isaac was the first child of promise, and then there was Jacob, thus the beginning of children. The children of promise are like Isaac, by God’s choice, but they run through all family lines. Even Gentiles are also Abraham’s children (Acts 15:12-18; Galatians 3:7-9,16,26-29; 4:21-31; 6:16). SHOWING that this has to do with SALVATION, NOT service! Descendants of Esau also made it into Abraham’s elect seed by God’s election (Amos 9:11-12). There is MUCH more than family inheritance or national blessings here~ eternal life is coming (9:22-24).  Children of God are by promise in many different ways, even before the world began (Titus 1:2; 2nd Timothy 1:9, etc.). God devised, purposed, and promised salvation in Christ before the world began (Ephesians 1:3-14). Adoption, or the obtaining of a son, is never by the choice of the adopted, by rather the adopter.

Are counted for the seed~Any promises by God to Abraham, his seed, or Israel must be applied to the elect seed God counts. God identified the child of promise, Isaac, and no crying or corrupting can change this true seed. All of the children of God are by the same process of God exercising His will and promise for us. If one believes otherwise you err not knowing the scriptures (Galatians 4:28)!
« Last Edit: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 04:47:45 by RB »

revc

  • Guest
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #168 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 09:38:32 »
Lots of things getting in the way of getting to this.
Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc on Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
This is merely an assertion with absolutely no linguistics to back it up. 
What I have that you seem to not care much about is scriptural proof. When Paul reasoned with men he did so out of the scriptures preserved by God for his people.

You have no scriptural proof, despite your claim.  I gave you the explanation of the genitive used in the scriptures you think teach your notion, but you said nothing against it, nor presented a counter proposal, based on linguistics.  You are not reasoning from the scriptures, like Paul, you are quoting a very old translation, which is an even later version of the original translation from over 400 years ago, while ignoring the Greek text on which that translation was based (a translation you appear to believe is inspired by God).  More than likely, you are as equally ignorant that the same genitives translated “faith of Christ” (πιστεως ιησου χριστο)  in Romans 3:22 are also found in 3:26 and translated “faith in Jesus”  (πιστεως ιησου).  Both cases are examples of the objective genitive, i.e., Jesus Christ is the object of faith.  In Galatians 2:16 the same thing is found, “δια πιστεως ιησου χριστου,” an objective genitive, stating the object of faith, as is εκ πιστεως χριστου, in the same verse. Galatians 3:22 uses the same objective genitive.  Jesus mentioned faith some 40 times in the recorded ministry, and never once did he refer to his own faith.  Aside from the error of using Romans 3:22, Galatians 2:16 and 3:22 as possessives you can’t find any NT writer speaking of Christ having faith.  No wonder you declined to provide a list.

That is what the scriptures say.  That is proof, as opposed to your “proof,” which is mere unfounded assertion. You were asked to accomplish one simple task, namely, back up your claim, and you declined.

The fact is, we are saved by God’s grace, through our faith in the redemptive work of Christ, which we learn of from no humanly originated ideas.  We learn of all redemptive ideas in the gospel (Rom. 10:17), which needs to be proclaimed to all people so that they can learn of their dire circumstances, having sinned, and the only available remedy to the situation, which is to be spiritually reborn in connection with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. We must join with him in death and burial of the old man of sin so that we may be resurrected in his likeness.   Unlike physical birth, where we have no say in the matter, we choose to believe the message of salvation and be reborn, allowing the gospel to work on our hearts and transform us into spiritual children of God. Reformation Theology lies to the contrary notwithstanding.

The only reason you want to believe that Christ had faith is because of the erroneous doctrine you have advanced here that God chooses to save a few people, and after they are saved by Christ’s faith and God’s irresistible grace they then get faith of their own, and not of their own choosing.  The Bible teaches nothing of the sort from beginning to end.

Quote from: RB
Quote from: Luke
Acts 17:2,3~"And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ."
The prophets, Jesus Christ and his apostles were given to the scripture ALONE for their doctrine and source of truth~period.

When Paul reasoned out of the scriptures they all understood the language being read.  You do not seem to want to deal with the language used by the KJV translators.  You were given opportunity to give reason from the text used by the translators, but, unless I missed it, you never gave your expert reasoning why those Greek scriptures should be genitives of possession rather than objective genitives.  Even if you chose to take the genitives as subjective, that would still leave you with genitives that produce the action of the verb, i.e., Jesus would produce faith in the believer, which is surely not what you asserted.  That leaves you with a genitive of possession.  I highly doubt that the translators of the KJV (or any translation) were using the genitives as possessives, as you are ignorantly reading into the texts.  They may have been giving them the sense of subjective genitives, but that is still no help to your absurd notion that The Word made flesh had faith while dwelling among us as opposed to intimate knowledge of the situation.  Romans 3 and Galatians 2 have been taken away from your imaginary list by rudimentary linguistics.  Since you had opportunity to add to that list and did not, I suspect that you have nothing to fall back on that states or implies that Christ possessed faith, as opposed to first-hand knowledge. 

This first-hand knowledge is founded upon the deity of the incarnate Word, who was, as John 1:18 says, “In the bosom of the Father” and, though even in “the form of a servant” while here, was, as John 3:13 says, “ο υιος του ανθρωπου ο ων εν τω ουρανω” (the son of man, which is in heaven).  Those are the words used by the KJV translators.  Surely you will not dispute that though the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us that, due to his divine nature he was still in heaven.  He is not as mere man, who must be either in one place or another, for although the Word came down from heaven he was still in heaven, as John 3:13 unequivocally states.  Why would he need faith if he was God in the flesh and still in intimate contact with deity? Paul states that Faith and Hope will one day cease (obviously when we are in heaven), so what possible explanation is there for The Son of Man, who IS in heaven to need faith?

Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc Reply #70 on: Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
Perhaps a list of all the scriptures that speak of Christ possessing faith
I gave some and you mocked them, proving to me that that is not what you are after. I will not cast pearls before a swine, for my Lord has commanded me not to do so, and I will not.

No, you gave your spin on scriptures without proving that the Greek from which the translation stems actually says what you are claiming. I mocked nothing, especially the word of God.  You were given an opportunity to explain your understanding of the genitives and you chose, rather, to ignore that and go on tirades. For someone who obviously fancies himself as a leader of the blind, possessing understanding beyond the attainment of mere humans, you sure failed to enlighten readers on basic Greek grammar.  Why would someone withhold such insights????

Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc Reply #70 on: Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
linguistic data backing up the translations would do well.
That's not needed and NONE of the apostles or Christ ever requested such an absurd thing. They used what they had, KNOWING God's promises to protect his word from the wicked generation of evil men who have no regard for his word, and certainly do not have the faith of God's elect trusting God to keep his word pure. So they wander through this world with NO solid faith in the holy scriptures professing themselves to be wise, yet God has blinded their eyes because of their proud spirit, thinking themselves that they are wise enough to figure this inspiration of the holy scriptures out. Such men are in for a big surprise and a very rude awakening.

This would be funny if it were not a serious matter.   Why would Christ or the apostles request anything when they would be the ones presenting and defending their position?  Others would have asked them to prove their positions and that is exactly what they did repeatedly.  You, on the other hand, run from such a task.  This paragraph of yours is an incoherent rambling that is so beside the point it is sad.  Why not just use what you have available, like Christ and his apostles did?  Use the TR, on which the KJV was based, and prove that what you asserted about Christ holds up linguistically?  I have an idea that you shirk that challenge because you are not equipped to step up to it.  If you have faith in a translation, surely your faith in the Greek text it was based on would be at least as firm, wouldn’t you think?  It is not asking too much that you resort to the TR and enlighten readers on the translation and import of the words employed by the Holy Spirit.

Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc Reply #70 on: Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
This is an example of ignorance of the original language and a seeming lack of interest in arriving at the meaning of the original language.
Sir, you are only deceiving yourself~you have NO CLUE of any original language and neither does any man living or that has lived.  All anyone has EVER had in what they have is in the translations given by ready scribes, from Moses on to our day! BY FAITH we trust God that he has preserved his word JUST AS God first gave it~if one does not have THAT FAITH he shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of God~ I'm NOT speaking of the kingdom of God in its final state, but the kingdom now where men and women lived KNOWING the truth and understanding it and love it...where they live by faith, and not by sight.

This is truly delusional.  I see you quote scripture quite often (then put your twisted spin on most of it), mainly a translation based on the Majority Text, and a later version than the first. If no man has any clue of any original language, just what language were those manuscripts used by Erasmus to assemble the TR?  What language were the KJV translators looking at when they chose the English words you are citing?????  Just where are you getting this faith that YOU have God’s word? Did He tell you this personally?  If you go to some translation (like the KJV) to prove that IT is God’s preserved word while the manuscripts it is based on are NOT God’s word, that is beyond absurd.

Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc Reply #70 on: Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
Before you can arrive at interpretation you must first determine translation.
SO WRONG! Divine revelation comes through the Spirit of God, NOT through knowing certain translations or by human wisdom, but to those who HUMBLE themselves and confess that they are little children seeking the truth forsaking all of their earthly wisdom trusting in God's mercy to reveal his hidden truths to them~much like Solomon when he first prayed unto God. Not that you care, but here it is.…

Sorry, but I am not wrong.  In order to understand what the Greek text (the specific case in view here) means, it must be translated into the proper words and language of the target audience.  That this even needs to be said speaks volumes about your true abilities to handle the word of God.   There is no translation into any language on earth that will not go back to the available Greek texts and apply all available learning to translate those texts into the target language so the readers of that translation can get the meaning and sense intended when the original writings were first made. 

I find it remarkable that you are trying to equate understanding of God’s will as equal to the miraculous gifts of wisdom and understanding given to Solomon.  In bold contradiction to your false assertion that revelation comes from the Spirit directly to a person, you try to use an old English translation of Hebrew texts to back that up after telling us that interpretations do NOT come from translations.  How do you justify using a translation to prove that no truths come by means of translations????  I suppose you think it makes you special if you can stand convinced that God is revealing hidden truths to you.  Why do you feel the need to quote translated scripture?  Do you believe that your understandings are revelations unable to be attained by reading the scriptures that were translated from Greek manuscripts?  Paul stated clearly that when we read his writings we are able to “understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.”  It does not take revelation from God beyond the inspired writings. 

Quote from: RB
Quote
1st King 3:3-14~"And Solomon loved the LORD, walking in the statutes of David his father: only he sacrificed and burnt incense in high places. And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there; for that was the great high place: a thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer upon that altar. In Gibeon the LORD appeared to Solomon in a dream by night: and God said, Ask what I shall give thee. And Solomon said, Thou hast shewed unto thy servant David my father great mercy, according as he walked before thee in truth, and in righteousness, and in uprightness of heart with thee; and thou hast kept for him this great kindness, that thou hast given him a son to sit on his throne, as it is this day. And now, O LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in. And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude. Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad: for who is able to judge this thy so great a people? And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing. And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment; Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches, and honour: so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days. And if thou wilt walk in my ways, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen thy days."
This is totally irrelevant to modern day.  Nobody, not even you, is given more, or different, understanding of God’s will than can be arrived at from reading the scriptures.  Unfortunately, some come to the scriptures with preconceptions, like your Reformation Theology, and then try to force the scriptures to support the ideas when they do not.  Others here have pointed out some of your failings adequately enough that I need not even enter those disputes.  Your response is basically to say, “I say the scriptures say ‘such and such’ so that ends that.”  The Watchtower Society acts similarly.  When challenged with the linguistic failings and irrational nature of your assertions you just blast everyone that does not accept your pronouncements.

Quote from: RB
Quote from: revc Reply #70 on: Mon Jul 30, 2018 - 08:44:38
It really makes no sense to discuss anything further with you if you are unwilling to defend your assertion that God incarnate had faith,
One thing then I'M FINISHED with you. I have NEVER said that God incarnate had faith, see you do not understand so it fruitless to carry on a conversation with you. THE MAN Jesus had faith as a MAN. Jesus was a complex person fully God, and fully man, it was the MAN, Jesus of Nazareth that lived in a body of flesh and blood that had faith, not God. The two natures of Jesus were ever separated from each other, what could be said of one, could NOT be said of the other.

You’re finished, huh?  Sure.  You are so proud of your heretical beliefs that you will not be able to avoid trying to convince yourself (and perhaps others) that you actually do know what you are talking about.  Oh, you will indeed answer.  You will not supply any scriptural proof that Christ had faith,  nor will you point to a text that specifies the object of that faith. You will go on a mouth-foaming rant against facts, and, if you even cite any passages, misuse more scripture, all the while believing the Reformation Theology delusion God is allowing you to believe, since believing the truth is obviously something you are disinclined to do.

So, you wish to separate the flesh and blood human body from the mind, which is the rational and moral consciousness of the spirit.  The spirit within the body is either divine (deity, in the case of Christ alone) or not (created by God and placed in a human body, as is the case with all humans).  The spirit is the source of all understanding, will, and conscience.  Faith does not reside in a material body but in the spiritual nature of man.  Faith is a decision based on evidence (i.e., faith comes by hearing the word of God Rom. 10:17. c.f. also Jn. 20:31).  If Jesus had faith, something you will never find affirmed in scripture, it could only issue from his spiritual nature.

Your assertion that the “two natures of Jesus were ever separated from each other” smacks of some kind of quasi-docetic gnosticism of the worst sort.  The spiritual nature of Jesus (divine) held total sway over all physical aspects and hence his pre-existent self (the Word) dominated any weaknesses the flesh naturally had.  Thus, he remained free from sin, doubt, deception, intimidation, and moral weakness.  Faith is only present where complete knowledge is not available.  As God in bodily form, Christ had first-hand knowledge of the events he was engaged in and where they would all end, he being the one in whom all things consist (Col. 1:17).

Quote from: RB
Learn what I believe before trying to attack me, when you attack me, learn what I do believe and teach.
I have not attacked you, but rather your doctrine.  I have stated some facts and given you opportunity to enlighten readers.  You squandered that opportunity in your first attempt. And, I have seen plenty from your pen to know enough of what you believe and that far too much of it is dead wrong and based on poor grasp of language.

RC

revc

  • Guest
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #169 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 16:35:36 »
Quote from: RB
1st Corinthians 1:21~"For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."
This salvation in verse 21 is used in a different sense than the word saved is used in verse 18! Here it is used in the SAME sense as Romans 1:16~the gospel save us unto the KNOWLEDGE of the truth...
This different sense stuff is non-sense.  Just because you say something that doesn’t make it true, you know.  There is no way to get your spin on that verse from the actual words, either Greek or English. Salvation in verse 21 is based on “what was preached”, which was Christ crucified. The salvation in verse 21 is based on the crucifixion of Christ, making it salvation which comes from his death/sacrifice, which is salvation from sin and condemnation.  There is no other salvation sense in this text.  Salvation is based on our believing the good news that Christ was crucified and punished in our place.  He became sin and was smitten of God for us.  When that message (which some scoff at) is believed salvation is possible.  There is no salvation from sin apart from the gospel of Christ’s sacrifice and consequent acceptance of it by hearers. 

There is no such language in the NT that we are saved UNTO knowledge.  Your ideas that God forces salvation from sin on a few and then gives them faith so they can then learn the Gospel is total bunkum, and taught nowhere in the scriptures. Quit making stuff up.

RC 

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #170 on: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 05:12:45 »
This different sense stuff is non-sense. 
Sir, it does not in the least surprise me that you think this but would surprise me if you agree. So, according to YOU "giving the scriptures their proper sense" is non-sense to do?
Quote from: Nehemiah
Nehemiah 8:2-8~"And Ezra the priest brought the law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month. And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law. And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam. And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up: And Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped the LORD with their faces to the ground. Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place. So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading."
No one will ever understand the scriptures until the man of God gives the proper sense to what is being read. But you think it is non-sense~that why men like you wander in darkness and confusion and deservedly so! Paul said the same thing, just a little different:
Quote from: Paul
2nd Timothy 2:15~"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
You cannot rightly divide UNLESS you give the scriptures their proper sense, impossible, but you think it is non-sense~keep thinking that, and you will die with a gospel that is another gospel that Paul cursed in Galatians 1:8,9 not once, but twice!
Quote from: revc Reply #169 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 16:35:36
Just because you say something that doesn’t make it true, you know.
I certainly know that and that's true of all men~
Quote from: Paul
Romans 3:4~God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."
That's why we judge every man by the word of God that God has so graciously given to us. 1st John 4:1....
Quote from: revc Reply #169 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 16:35:36
There is no way to get your spin on that verse from the actual words, either Greek
Sir, I DO NOT care what any SO-CALLED Greek said~ Your golden calf that you worship is an idol that can neither speak, see, or hear, and truly does not exist...that is, the original epistles and gospel, etc. given by inspiration of God.... yet what we have is the very word of God in our own language, which you reject as infallible.
Quote from: revc Reply #169 on: Tue Aug 07, 2018 - 16:35:36
or English
It can be easily proven and I did by comparing scriptures WITH scriptures and understanding the word of God overall concerning the new birth.

I have a meeting to attend but will come back and finish this post and answer the one above that you posted when I can.
« Last Edit: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 05:16:33 by RB »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #171 on: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 07:35:14 »
No one will ever understand the scriptures until the man of God gives the proper sense to what is being read. But you think it is non-sense~that why men like you wander in darkness and confusion and deservedly so!
RB, it is you who give a questionable interpretation to a verse or a passage and then quote Nehemiah 8:8 to buttress your beliefs.  You speak of "practical salvation" and give it a meaning and flavor that simply does not exist. It is almost always your "sense" that is in conflict with what the passage actually says.

Now I find that particularly interesting in that you like to quote Nehemiah on this issue.  I would acknowledge Adam Clark's "sense" of the passage from Nehemiah in light of your continued objection to our appeal on many occasions to the Greek text.  The problem explained in Nehemiah was in preaching to the Israelites who had come out of the Babylonian captivity. They had been so long, seventy years, in Babylon that many if not most had likely lost the knowledge or familiarity of the original Hebrew language in which the Law was written.  The Hebrew language of the Law was no longer the familiar and spoken language. 

What is described there is that all those mentioned in Nehemiah 8:7 were apparently still fluent in the original Hebrew.  They read from the Law in Hebrew and then translated and/or interpreted it [gave it the sense] into the the Babylonian language or dialect in which the captives had become conversant.  They read from the Law in Hebrew and translated it into the language that the captives understood. They gave it the gave "the sense, and caused them to understand the reading".  That is, they gave it the sense that the Hebrew text conveyed.  They translated it into the captive dialect or language.  It is as if a Greek scholar would read from the Greek text and give the "sense" of it to an English speaking audience.

The sense they gave it was not, as you suppose and so often try to convince there rest of us, some quirky and illegitimate meaning of the text as written.  Rather the sense they gave it was the straightforward meaning it carried in the original language, in that case, Hebrew.  It was very much the same when some attempt to appeal to the assistance offered by those who understand the Greek text of the NT or the Hebrew text of the OT. 

You said,
Quote from: RB
Sir, I DO NOT care what any SO-CALLED Greek said~ Your golden calf that you worship is an idol that can neither speak, see, or hear, and truly does not exist...that is, the original epistles and gospel, etc. given by inspiration of God.... yet what we have is the very word of God in our own language, which you reject as infallible.
First of all, the only Golden Calf here is your KJV which you present as the infallible word of God.  It is not.  Moreover it is you who refuse to accept the "sense" in which the word of God was given, i.e., the sense that is to be found in the Greek text.  It is as if the Israelite returning from the Babylonian captivity refused to acknowledge the "sense" of the meaning to be found in the Hebrew text of the Law as originally written.

Offline RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6303
  • Manna: 336
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #172 on: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 14:16:44 »
The problem explained in Nehemiah was in preaching to the Israelites who had come out of the Babylonian captivity. They had been so long, seventy years, in Babylon that many if not most had likely lost the knowledge or familiarity of the original Hebrew language in which the Law was written.  The Hebrew language of the Law was no longer the familiar and spoken language

What is described there is that all those mentioned in Nehemiah 8:7 were apparently still fluent in the original Hebrew.  They read from the Law in Hebrew and then translated and/or interpreted it [gave it the sense] into the the Babylonian language or dialect in which the captives had become conversant.  They read from the Law in Hebrew and translated it into the language that the captives understood. They gave it the gave "the sense, and caused them to understand the reading".  That is, they gave it the sense that the Hebrew text conveyed.  They translated it into the captive dialect or language.  It is as if a Greek scholar would read from the Greek text and give the "sense" of it to an English speaking audience.
All the emphasis is mine to expose your vain, and sinful speculations and false assumptions concerning the natural language of the returning Judahites.
Quote
Nehemiah 13:23,24~"In those days also saw I Jews that had married wives of Ashdod, of Ammon, and of Moab: And their children spake half in the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language, but according to the language of each people."
PROVES that only the children of those married to foreigners could not speak the native language.

Amazing the length people like you go to twist God's word just to defend their position, nothing new under heaven. A dear brother who brought this to my attention, and since he did, I have many more that I can be used to support that the Jews never lost their native language, never as you desire for others to believe. 

Now, I'm NOT going to waste time with you over such things, I will move forward defending greater truths concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ, that you men seek to destroy with your own gospel that allows you to be co-partner with Christ in your salvation from sin and condemnation. 

I will mention this one time that hundreds of years before men like me, OTHERS taught the same concerning giving the scriptures their proper sense especially so with the words save/saved/salvation. I'm going to post an article written over three hundred years ago....later.
 
« Last Edit: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 14:21:55 by RB »

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #173 on: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 14:51:48 »
4WD beat me to the punch so I affirm what all Bible students understand:

Neh. 8:7 Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place.
Neh. 8:8 So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the READING.

These people were defacto Babylonians.  Translations were not permitted in the synagogues so that the readers TRANSLATED the Hebrew.

The one piece pattern for the Holy Convocations held on the first days of gatherings for festivals.

Even God leaves written WORDS which can be understood contrary to people who claim that they are supernaturally inspired


« Last Edit: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 14:54:38 by Kenneth Sublett »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Manna: 270
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Yogi, would you consider debating me using your three posts?
« Reply #174 on: Thu Aug 09, 2018 - 14:59:48 »
RB,

It was a seventy year captivity; the majority, except for a few would, have been such children upon the return.  But clearly the Law was not written in a language unintelligible to one fluent in the Hebrew.  The problem wasn't some weird sense of the writing that could only be understood by an "elect" few.  That such is thought to have been the case  is the real sinful speculations and false assumptions and is yet one more disastrous teaching that becomes necessary due to the false doctrine of total depravity.  Because if it were, as you say that it is to be understood only by the "elect" few, then there would have been no need whatsoever for the readers of the Law to give them the "sense" of as you believe.  Being totally depraved, as you present total depravity, they were incapable of understanding, no matter how much "sense" was injected into the reading of it.

 

     
anything