Arminian Weaknesses reflect Calvinism

[The Archangel]

So the translators used foreknew instead of chose for what reason when "chose" was readily available to them?

Because translation is not primarily concerned with explicating meaning from the original text. Translation is primarily concerned with passing on--as close as possible--the original text into a new language.

As such, the translators looked at the component parts of the word προγινώσκω and made what amounts to a transliteration (though it is not strictly speaking or technically speaking a transliteration).

Paul's usage dictates the meaning, not the translation.

So, the translators did their jobs. But, as I said earlier, that is only part of the equation. Whether a translation or the original is read, meaning still must be mined from the text (encompassing syntax) and application must be made too.

A summary of the process of preaching (or teaching) a text expositionally is this: This is what the text says, this is what the text means, this is how the text applies.

All that translators do is help with the first step. It is not in their purview to attach meaning to the text itself--that was the author's job...and in this case, Paul, the author, is quite clear that his usage means chose.

The Archangel

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I haven't read Mein Kampf either, but I know Hitler was wrong in his actions.

I don't have to read Calvin's words to see that his theology is flawed.

Thats your logic.....oh boy? Then I would assume that Spurgeon was doing goosteps down in ole London town.

Al Mohler in Kentucky must have SS units patrolling. LOL!

Rippon needs to learn to ignore you. Seriously your commentary is bizarre.

 

[Van]

Hi Archangel,
Secondly, an adverbial phrase does answer the question "how." But these dative clauses cannot answer that question because of what they modify. The immediate antecedent is not the verb "chose" but is the accusative noun "salvation." Since these dative clauses modify a noun, and not a verb, they cannot be adverbial

This is simply rewriting the grammar to fit your doctrine. the "en + dative" provides a prepositional phrase used adverbially to say how the chose was made - through sanctification by the Spirit - and used adverbially to provide the basis of the choice, you were chosen because of faith in the truth.

Thus the actual Greek grammar supports my view and demonstrates your view is simply another rewrite to fit your doctrine into the text.

These clauses modify the verb, describing how and why the action was taken. QED

Remember what I said, Calvinists turn the noun salvation into a verb so then the adverbial phrases describing how and why the action was taken can be applied to the noun rather than the verb. Total rewrite of the grammar of the verse.

In summary, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says God chose Thessalonians as first fruits for salvation and He did it by means of sanctification by the Holy Spirit - who placed us in Christ - and on the basis of Him crediting our faith as righteousness, hence through faith in the truth. Absolutely everything in the grammar supports this view. Thus the charge that the grammar disallowed this view was utterly false.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

When Calvinist stop rewriting scripture, they will abandon Calvinism and embrace a view or views nearer to the middle of the divide between Arminianism and Calvinism. Anyway, that is my prayer.

Here is the comment that worries me about this guy.

Dont you know these comments make us more resolute? Your efforts are tad amount to whacking yourself with a hammer in your own skull. You only hurt yourself.

 

[Van]

This is how Calvinism has interpreted 2Thessalonians 2:13 ... chose you as first fruits for salvation [and saved you] through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

Adding to God's word should be avoided.

As for not presenting the truth because Calvinists are unwilling to accept it, well that would seem to be unlike Christ. God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.
Many are called but few are chosen.

 

[Van]

Sorry for the double post but I needed to edit it to fix typos.

Hi Archangel,
Secondly, an adverbial phrase does answer the question "how." But these dative clauses cannot answer that question because of what they modify. The immediate antecedent is not the verb "chose" but is the accusative noun "salvation." Since these dative clauses modify a noun, and not a verb, they cannot be adverbial

This is simply rewriting the grammar to fit your doctrine. the "en + dative" provides a prepositional phrase used adverbially to say how the choice was made - through sanctification by the Spirit - and used adverbially to provide the basis of the choice, you were chosen because God credited your faith in the truth as righteousness.

Thus the actual Greek grammar supports my view and demonstrates your view is simply another rewrite to fit your doctrine into the text.

These clauses modify the verb, describing how and why the action was taken. QED

Remember what I said, Calvinists turn the noun salvation into a verb so then the adverbial phrases describing how and why the action was taken can be applied to the noun rather than the verb. Total rewrite of the grammar of the verse.

In summary, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says God chose Thessalonians as first fruits for salvation and He did it by means of sanctification by the Holy Spirit - who placed us in Christ - and on the basis of Him crediting our faith as righteousness, hence through faith in the truth. Absolutely everything in the grammar supports this view. Thus the charge that the grammar disallowed this view was utterly false.

 

[jbh28]

I find it funny that Van doesn't even refute the arguments for the grammar from Archange but just says that he is "rewriting the grammar to fit your doctrine."

Of course this is coming from a guy that didn't even say anything about adverbial clauses but argued that when you have a prepositional phrase, you drop it out to find out what the next work is referring to. I was the one that brought up adverbial vs adjective phrase. Van, just give it up.

 

[Van]

Yet another post about my qualifications and behavior. Shall we go over it one more time. Who chose? God!, Who is the actor, the one doing the choosing? God, God is the subject and verb is chose. Now things that relate to the action are adverbial. So if a prepositional phrase indicates the time of choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates of the purpose of the choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates the means of choosing answering question "how" , it is an adverbial phrase. And if a prepositional phrase indicates the basis of the choice, answering the question why, it is an adverbial phrase.

What is all this business about dropping out or dropping down prepositional phrases, in a grammar structure diagram? That is how it is done. Top line, subject, verb, direct object/compliment: God - subject, chose -verb, you - direct object - what was chosen.

Now the compliment is "as first fruits" and compliments the direct object you.

Now the adverbial phrase "for salvation" describes the reason or purpose of the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "through sanctification" is "en + dative" construction indicating the means used to perform the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "[through] faith is [en] + dative construction indicating the basis for the choice, answering the question why.

But why not say these prepositional phrases modify "salvation" because it is closer? Because salvation is not in the verb form, so prepositional phrases describing the action do not apply to it. Therefore the Calvinists claim even though it is in noun form, it contains the verbal idea of being saved, a verb. So they say, ignore that it does not show action, because if it had been written differently, it would take the adverbial phrases.

I kid you not, that is how they nullify the grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13

 

[Robert Snow]

Thats your logic.....oh boy? Then I would assume that Spurgeon was doing goosteps down in ole London town.

Al Mohler in Kentucky must have SS units patrolling. LOL!

Rippon needs to learn to ignore you. Seriously your commentary is bizarre.

I heard a rumor that the goose step actually began with Calvin, but I don't know.

Actually, I have been watching the video series, "Band of Brothers" the past week or so, so WW2 references seem to be on my mind.

I guess you don't appreciate the art of comparison. Maybe it's a Calvinistic trait that causes you to assign meanings beyond the mere comparison, but you might be better served if you concentrated on the similarities and not try to read too much into it.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I heard a rumor that the goose step actually began with Calvin, but I don't know.

Actually, I have been watching the video series, "Band of Brothers" the past week or so, so WW2 references seem to be on my mind.

I guess you don't appreciate the art of comparison. Maybe it's a Calvinistic trait that causes you to assign meanings beyond the mere comparison, but you might be better served if you concentrated on the similarities and not try to read too much into it.

Yea maybe but you know that we are not supposed to throw barbs at one another. I remember a story told by my grand uncle who told me his mother used to have to use a password to get her & her kids into church because the enemy catholics were infiltrating & bombing their churches. Conversely my Catholic Grandfather told story's how the Protestant boys threw rocks at them going to their churches. In these days, have we learned nothing? Are we not Salt & Light even in times of tribulation? Sometimes I wonder.

 

[Van]

How to fix Arminianism so it conforms to scripture? Change from salvation sustained by works, an Old Covenant relic, to salvation sustained by God, 1 Peter 1:3-5, but failure to earn rewards through misunderstanding or faithlessness is taught as a loss of part of salvation.

Get rid of Prevenient Grace and accept that in our fallen unregenerate state we can set our minds on some spiritual things and understand the milk of the gospel, 1 Corinthians 3:1-3.

Get rid of election of foreseen faith in foreseen individuals before creation, and adopt the view that the election is Ephesians 1:4 was corporate, but the election described in 2 Thessalonians 2:13 was individual during our lifetime after we had heard and responded to the gospel. Thus born again believers are the "called, chosen and faithful."

God Bless

 

[jbh28]

Yet another post about my qualifications and behavior. Shall we go over it one more time. Who chose? God!, Who is the actor, the one doing the choosing? God, God is the subject and verb is chose. Now things that relate to the action are adverbial. So if a prepositional phrase indicates the time of choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates of the purpose of the choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates the means of choosing answering question "how" , it is an adverbial phrase. And if a prepositional phrase indicates the basis of the choice, answering the question why, it is an adverbial phrase.

What is all this business about dropping out or dropping down prepositional phrases, in a grammar structure diagram? That is how it is done. Top line, subject, verb, direct object/compliment: God - subject, chose -verb, you - direct object - what was chosen.

Now the compliment is "as first fruits" and compliments the direct object you.

Now the adverbial phrase "for salvation" describes the reason or purpose of the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "through sanctification" is "en + dative" construction indicating the means used to perform the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "[through] faith is [en] + dative construction indicating the basis for the choice, answering the question why.

But why not say these prepositional phrases modify "salvation" because it is closer? Because salvation is not in the verb form, so prepositional phrases describing the action do not apply to it. Therefore the Calvinists claim even though it is in noun form, it contains the verbal idea of being saved, a verb. So they say, ignore that it does not show action, because if it had been written differently, it would take the adverbial phrases.

I kid you not, that is how they nullify the grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13

phrases that modify adverbial phrases (like "for salvation") would be an....adverbial phrase.

 

[Skandelon]

Yet, you presume you hold the truth when, in fact, you could be quite wrong. You, sir, are also "begging the question."

Believing your argument is true is NOT the fallacy of question begging. It's when the argument being made presumes a point that is up for debate. If you can show me specifically where I've done this I will address it, otherwise this is unfounded.

 

[Skandelon]

How is it that this only works in your favor... :wavey:

It goes both ways, but when he makes the presumption that my view is false by suggesting that my combating of a false doctrine (Calvinism) is an "obsession," "half-cocked," a waste of time or whatever then he is begging the question by presuming that which is up for debate. My posts are presenting arguments in support for my view, while his replies are mere accusations of presumption bases upon the premise that I must be wrong. Classic question begging and unhelpful to a discussion.

 

[Van]

Shall we go over it one more time. Who chose? God!, Who is the actor, the one doing the choosing? God, God is the subject and verb is chose. Now things that relate to the action are adverbial. So if a prepositional phrase indicates the time of choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates of the purpose of the choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates the means of choosing answering question "how" , it is an adverbial phrase. And if a prepositional phrase indicates the basis of the choice, answering the question why, it is an adverbial phrase.

What is all this business about dropping out or dropping down prepositional phrases, in a grammar structure diagram? That is how it is done. Top line, subject, verb, direct object/compliment: God - subject, chose -verb, you - direct object - what was chosen.

Now the compliment is "as first fruits" and compliments the direct object you.

Now the adverbial phrase "for salvation" describes the reason or purpose of the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "through sanctification" is "en + dative" construction indicating the means used to perform the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "[through] faith is [en] + dative construction indicating the basis for the choice, answering the question why.

But why not say these prepositional phrases modify "salvation" because it is closer? Because salvation is not in the verb form, so prepositional phrases describing the action do not apply to it. Therefore the Calvinists claim even though it is in noun form, it contains the verbal idea of being saved, a verb. So they say, ignore that it does not show action, because if it had been written differently, it would take the adverbial phrases.

I kid you not, that is how they nullify the grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13

 

[Skandelon]

Van,

This may have been mentioned already, but I think in regard to 2 Thess. 2:13 it should also be noted that Paul is speaking as an "apostles of the Gentiles" to one of his predominately Gentile congregations. This is significant in discerning the intent of the author. Especially in light of the fact that almost everyone around them was saying that God would never chose to save dirty Gentiles. It makes much more sense in this context for Paul to speak as a apostle chosen from Israel by God to be a messenger to the Gentiles, to declare:

"But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter."

Paul is clearly encouraging his Gentiles brethren in the truth that God has chosen from the beginning to save the Gentiles through faith in the truth which was "passed on to [them]" through "word of mouth and letter."

 

[glfredrick]

It goes both ways, but when he makes the presumption that my view is false by suggesting that my combating of a false doctrine (Calvinism) is an "obsession," "half-cocked," a waste of time or whatever then he is begging the question by presuming that which is up for debate. My posts are presenting arguments in support for my view, while his replies are mere accusations of presumption bases upon the premise that I must be wrong. Classic question begging and unhelpful to a discussion.

Unless what he said about you is in fact true...

That IS your mission, is it not?

You are not looking for "truth." You are looking to defeat Calvinism. Big difference, and I don't even have to assume that Calvinism is true to hold that as a statement of fact. That IS what you are doing.

I also note that you will not entertain arguments that refute your position. Makes your position something akin to fundamentalism.

 

[glfredrick]

Shall we go over it one more time. Who chose? God!, Who is the actor, the one doing the choosing? God, God is the subject and verb is chose. Now things that relate to the action are adverbial. So if a prepositional phrase indicates the time of choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates of the purpose of the choosing, it is an adverbial phrase. If a prepositional phrase indicates the means of choosing answering question "how" , it is an adverbial phrase. And if a prepositional phrase indicates the basis of the choice, answering the question why, it is an adverbial phrase.

What is all this business about dropping out or dropping down prepositional phrases, in a grammar structure diagram? That is how it is done. Top line, subject, verb, direct object/compliment: God - subject, chose -verb, you - direct object - what was chosen.

Now the compliment is "as first fruits" and compliments the direct object you.

Now the adverbial phrase "for salvation" describes the reason or purpose of the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "through sanctification" is "en + dative" construction indicating the means used to perform the choice.

Next, the adverbial phrase "[through] faith is [en] + dative construction indicating the basis for the choice, answering the question why.

But why not say these prepositional phrases modify "salvation" because it is closer? Because salvation is not in the verb form, so prepositional phrases describing the action do not apply to it. Therefore the Calvinists claim even though it is in noun form, it contains the verbal idea of being saved, a verb. So they say, ignore that it does not show action, because if it had been written differently, it would take the adverbial phrases.

I kid you not, that is how they nullify the grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13

That does not "nulify" the grammar of 2 Thes 2:13. That is WHAT 2 Thes 2:13 says when interpreted correctly according to the rules of grammar.

 

[Van]

Changing a noun into a verb, changing for salvation into to be saved nullifies the grammar of 2 Thessalonians 2:13. Now we all know that grammar only points us toward a likely meaning, but without also analyzing the argument, the flow of thought contextually, and other verses pertaining to the same topic, especially by the same author, we could be mistaken and sacrifice truth on the alter of grammar.

My point, is that my view of what Paul was saying in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, more closely follows the rules of grammar, than the Calvinist view. And the arguments, advanced by some Calvinists, that my view was inconsistent with the grammar were utterly false.

Note that my view of 2 Thessalonians 2:13 does not stand alone, but is only one verse supporting my minimalist view that we are the "called, chosen and faithful" and not the chosen, called and faithful. Many are called but few are chosen. God chose the poor of this world, rich in faith and heirs... to that which God promised to those who love Him. James 2:5.
Many verses clearly indicate we were chosen (for salvation) through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

 

[Skandelon]

Unless what he said about you is in fact true...

Incorrect. Even if he is right, he would still be begging the question by presuming so. I am making arguments in support of my views, he is presuming them to be in error by calling them "obsessive" and "half-cocked" without any argumentation to back up his presumptions. Thus, he is begging the question.

That IS your mission, is it not?

My mission is probably no different than yours on this board fredrick, just because I may be more veracious than you doesn't necessarily prove a different intent.

You are not looking for "truth." You are looking to defeat Calvinism.

That begs the question by presuming Calvinism is truth, when in fact my arguments are made to show otherwise. Unless you wish to make a rebuttal of the arguments I've presented or present new arguments against my view then you are offering nothing of value to our discussion. It just becomes a big childish game of "Nu-hu and you too."

I also note that you will not entertain arguments that refute your position. Makes your position something akin to fundamentalism.

Prove it. Show me where I've refused to entertain arguments against my position? Now, if you mean that I don't agree with or decline to rebut arguments that is much different, but to charge that I don't even "entertain" them is an unfounded accusation.