Featured A Scripture question [particularly for Calvinists]

I either missed it or did not understand your argument being definitive, that it cannot be understood any other way.

 

That would seem to be a totally plausible understanding of the writers argument. How can we show it is the sole valid argument?

 

Really. I never, sadly ever diagamed a sentence in my life. English grammar was my worst subject. You diagram it for me. Any grammar I migth know, which is very very little, comes from looking at Greek grammar. So what ever interest I have in grammar comes from my study of the Bible. Greek grammar are the word endings, and sometimes prefixes. Greek grammar is in the spellings of the Greek words. English is the word order. Old English is some what different than our modern English. "ye are" could be in modern English "you have been." From the Greek, "God was the Logos," in English the word order needs to be "the Word was God." And I see what looks like exceptions being made too. Instead of "The Word was in the beginning," the Greek word order is kept, "In the beginning was the Word." With Genesis 1:1 in mind.

And your suggestion was not a bad suggestion by any means.

https://timmybrister.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Disciple-Making-and-Sentence-Diagramming.pdf

 

.

Whether one says it speaks of a believer or one who heard and simply failed to believe for what ever reason, it describes an impossibility, what collectively as a whole cannot happen.

 

That is an interpreation of what it says about "them." The text does not explicitly say that they where saved or not. The term "believed" is not used, though it can be surmised that "they" did believe from what is describe of "them" in the text. (Stony ground in the parable of the Sower, could be supposed.)

 

Not us. We where not around. Only to Jewish Christians. Then does that mean it cannot apply to us? ". . . know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. . . ." -- Deuteronomy 8:3.
It describes an impossible. And after making that argument writes his audience, ". . . But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. . . ." -- Hebrews 6:9. Which can be understood that that impossible did not pretain to obtaining salvation. Unless you think one can be saved and lost. That would not be Calvinism.