A simple fact

[InTheLight]

I have dealt with Scripture, and I get the same response, "You don't understand what this really means." All because I do not believe your point of view. Your theology is clearly dictating what you think the Scriptures say instead of letting the Scriptures dictate your theology. It's the same old song and dance every time someone engages with y'all. Someone posts confessional statements or copy and pastes out of a systematic theology book. Really, it's quite exhausting and not very helpful.

You've discovered how the Calvinist debates. They will say, "You don't understand what it really means" or "That scripture isn't saying what you think it says" or "the underlying Greek means something different than the English translation" or "you're taking that scripture out of context" or "that scripture is addressed to believers not unbelievers" (or unbelievers, not believers), etc. etc.

Then comes the Baptist Confession of 1689, or the 1644 Baptist Confession, or the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Which is why I don't participate much in these discussions anymore.

 

[SovereignGrace]

@SovereignGrace



I then said, "Surely he READ the truth about Christ...And Glen said , "Nope"....
Emphasis mine

Well, he’s wrong. If ppl don’t need to hear or read the gospel, why go and proclaim the gospel to all ppl’s?

 

[JonShaff]

Well, he’s wrong. If ppl don’t need to hear or read the gospel, why go and proclaim the gospel to all ppl’s?

I agree with you. And in my opinion, this distorts the Gospel. But, I do not see anyone keeping Glen's views in context..what I do see is many people agreeing with him, instead of challenging him.

Saying that man has a responsibility to Trust in Christ's atoning work after they hear the Gospel of Christ is Biblical Truth.

 

[1689Dave]

Sometimes people hear the gospel and years later they experience Christ. In my case, I heard about Christ in Sunday School as a kid. Years later from out of the blue I began experiencing the fruit of the Holy Spirit in my heart. I was not a believer nor was I seeking Christ at the time. I told a friend that I didn't know what was happening to me, but I think Christ is real. On the evening of the third joyous day I began remorsing over my sins and more sins I didn't know existed. And weeping, I asked Jesus to forgive me and come into my heart, (I remembered this from way back when). Falling asleep exhausted in tears, I woke the next morning with Joy I could not contain.

I began studying the bible and witnessing about how real Christ is. And about the obvious change he made in me. A string of conversions followed in those I knew, wanting what I had. I eventually found a Church to baptize me and the rest is history.

I don't know how this fits anyone's theory, but it's how I entered the kingdom.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Nope... I've heard that argument too... My question is this if hearing the gospel is instrumental to Salvation and as important as that doctrine is why is their no mention of it at the cross?... We are talking of scripture not speculation... My Son didn't need to hear the gospel or read it, his belief came through the heart... Brother Glen

And you’re off your theological rocker. Romans 10:14-17 easily refutes this mysticism. Faith comes through hearing(also reading) the word of God.

 

[1689Dave]

And you’re off your theological rocker. Romans 10:14-17 easily refutes this mysticism. Faith comes through hearing(also reading) the word of God.

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

But those aren’t divinely inspired.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

Here’s the thing, the Bible isn’t explicitly clear one way or t’other about the eternal state of dying infants. Ppl want to flock to 2 Samuel 12 for support. But if babies have a guaranteed salvation upon death, allowing them to grow up, only to see them die lost, would be most cruel.

I am not saying babies that die go to hell, but I am not automatically ushering them into heaven, either.

 

[tyndale1946]

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

AMEN!.. AMEN... AMEN!... Brother Glen

 

[SovereignGrace]

AMEN!.. AMEN... AMEN!... Brother Glen

How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHOBRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!” However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.[Romans 10:14-17]

The word of God is either sufficient or it’s not to save ppl. I say it is the sole source of our faith.

 

[tyndale1946]

But those aren’t divinely inspired.

No it isn't but it came from the inspired written word of God that is!... Brother Glen

 

[InTheLight]

Then comes the Baptist Confession of 1689, or the 1644 Baptist Confession, or the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

And there it is!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Here’s the thing, the Bible isn’t explicitly clear one way or t’other about the eternal state of dying infants. Ppl want to flock to 2 Samuel 12 for support. But if babies have a guaranteed salvation upon death, allowing them to grow up, only to see them die lost, would be most cruel.

I am not saying babies that die go to hell, but I am not automatically ushering them into heaven, either.

Scripture is abundantly clear......
infants aren't sinners.

I John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

Note: it isn't a disease as all gnostics preach. It isn't some transferred guilt which is contained in male spermatozoa....it's the transgression of the LAW.
Sin is a legal judgement of guilt upon one who knows right from wrong and subsequently disobeys it.

Sin is disobedience to revealed Law...commandment understood, known and broken.
But sin is not imputed where there is no law:

Rom 5:12-14
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Without knowledge of the law, there is no sin:

Rom 7:7-12
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

To hear Apostle number three agree let's hear from not John, nor Paul but James, who agrees completely:
Jas. 4:17
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

The Scriptures could not be more clear....the Old Testament affirms the patently obvious:
Deut. 1: 39
Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

THE QUESTION OF THE FATE OF INFANTS IS NOT SOMETHING GOD LEFT TO MYSTERY

It is only mystery if one (as all gnostics do) believes that sin is a communicable disease (in complete defiance of Scriptural revelation) which poisons the essence of a creature which cannot speak, cannot reason, does not either obey nor disobey, has no concept of right and wrong and has no more sense than to cry for milk and helplessly lay in it's own urine and feces........

This is the helpless creature which the Calvinist dogma teaches that God has nothing but hatred and loathing for....

The very aborted children in the womb that God supposedly wants to protect, he simultaneously considers infinitely odious and hateful to him. and nothing would please him more than to torture them for eternity because of the communicable disease (apparently) of sin they inherited.

Sorry Calvinists but the following well-phrased dogma:

Both the Westminster and LBC say: III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

while logically consistent, is beyond the pale, and reflects a God I not only don't know but won't and would not under any free circumstances worship.

Thus,
Sovereign's conclusion, rightly derived and inescapable from that dogma:

I am not saying babies that die go to hell, but I am not automatically ushering them into heaven, either

Is not MERELY mistaken or wrong.
It is against all revealed Scripture.
It is gnostic
It is heresy
It is Evil​

 

[Iconoclast]

InTheLight,

You've discovered how the Calvinist debates

.
Yes....they read posts containing error and the offer correction

They will say, "You don't understand what it really means"

yes....because 98 out of 100 times that is accurate...you do not understand.We can tell by what you post, and by what you do not post.

or "That scripture isn't saying what you think it says"

yes... this is like the other offense except here the non cal offers some novelty which no one has offered at anytime in church history.

or "the underlying Greek means something different than the English translation"

Non cals are shocked to learn this....like when a cal tells them that the term whosoever is not in Jn 3:16...they protest and whine then deflect away to something else. They never own up to it even after the cal explains the REAL meaning that they hate. This is when they start accusing the Calvinist of being rude and lacking love....

or "you're taking that scripture out of context"

yes of course this happens....

or "that scripture is addressed to believers not unbelievers" (or unbelievers, not believers), etc. etc.

That is because that is how scripture is written....that you think it a strange idea is very instructive.

Then comes the Baptist Confession of 1689, or the 1644 Baptist Confession, or the Westminster Confession of Faith.

Solid documents that non Cals treat like Kryptonite.....because they cannot answer those teachings without being exposed as defective in their theology.

Which is why I don't participate much in these discussions anymore.

Yes...the reason is instead of learning, you want to resist emotionally, but you cannot support your foul positions with scripture.

 

[Benjamin]

InTheLight:
or "the underlying Greek means something different than the English translation"

.Non cals are shocked to learn this....like when a cal tells them that the term whosoever is not in Jn 3:16...they protest and whine then deflect away to something else. They never own up to it even after the cal explains the REAL meaning that they hate.

More like "shocked to learn" what …certain … “Greek Scholars” would try to insist about the text to support their system. Icon, you seriously need to question the credentials and motives of those Greek Card carriers who instruct you on the "REALITY" in this matter of translation! …or perhaps taking off those Calvie glasses might help you to see better and "own up" to the truth which all these translators did in fact place that term into this verse for good reason.



John 3:16


(KJV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


(ASV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.


(BBE) For God had such love for the world that he gave his only Son, so that whoever has faith in him may not come to destruction but have eternal life.


(Darby) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal.


(ERV) Yes, God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him would not be lost but have eternal life.


(ESV) "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


(Geneva) For God so loued the worlde, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten Sonne, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.


(ISV) "For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.


(KJV+) ForG1063 GodG2316 soG3779 lovedG25 theG3588 world,G2889 thatG5620 he gaveG1325 hisG848 only begottenG3439 Son,G5207 thatG2443 whosoeverG3956 believethG4100 inG1519 himG846 should notG3361 perish,G622 butG235 haveG2192 everlastingG166 life.G2222


(KJV-1611) For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.


(MKJV) For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.


(NIV) For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.


(RSV) For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


(NASB) For God so loved the world, that He gave His [a]only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.


(NKJV) For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Just tryin to help you brotha, don't hate!

 

[JonShaff]

My Logos Bible program says 'whoever' is in the text

 

[InTheLight]

InTheLight,
.

yes....because 98 out of 100 times that is accurate...you do not understand.We can tell by what you post, and by what you do not post.

Little known fact--Calvinists are psychic. They can tell that others are not understanding things by the things they do not say!

yes... this is like the other offense except here the non cal offers some novelty which no one has offered at anytime in church history.

Appeal to tradition fallacy.

Non cals are shocked to learn this....like when a cal tells them that the term whosoever is not in Jn 3:16...they protest and whine then deflect away to something else.

All those Greek scholars that worked on all those translations across the centuries--they're just dumb!

This is when they start accusing the Calvinist of being rude and lacking love....

That needs no explaining. Just look at your responses in this post. Or just about any post to me or other non-Cals.

yes of course this happens....

That is because that is how scripture is written....that you think it a strange idea is very instructive.

Speaking of taking scripture out of context and applying it to an audience far removed from the original audience, how's that misapplication of Ezekiel 36 working for you guys? You know the prophecy about how Israel will be restored again and the way Calvinists use it to "prove" man needs a new heart before he can believe the Gospel.

Yes...the reason is instead of learning, you want to resist emotionally, but you cannot support your foul positions with scripture.

Already said why I don't participate in these threads much anymore. Because of responses EXACTLY like you provided.

Oh, and as to the charge I don't use scripture:
Does God allow Divorce Today?

 

[InTheLight]

My Logos Bible program says 'whoever' is in the text

Besides the Westminster Confession and the London Baptist Confession of 1689, you've got to use the Calvinist's dictionary to understand scripture.

All: The Elect
Everyone: The Elect
The World: The Elect
Whosoever: The Elect

 

[Iconoclast]

2443 [e]
hina
ἵνα
that
Conj
3956 [e]
pas
πᾶς
everyone
Adj-NMS
3588 [e]
ho
ὁ
-
Art-NMS
4100 [e]
pisteuōn
πιστεύων
believing
V-PPA-NMS
1519 [e]
eis
εἰς
in
Prep
846 [e]
auton
αὐτὸν ,
him
PPr

 

[Iconoclast]

"Benjamin,
Hello Benjamin....hope you and family are doing well...thanks for the attempted help...I will shorten your list for you

John 3:16
16 for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.

3439 [e] monogenē μονογενῆ only begotten, Adj-AMS
1325 [e] edōken ἔδωκεν, he gave, V-AIA-3S
2443 [e] hina ἵνα that Conj
3956 [e] pas πᾶς everyone Adj-NMS
3588 [e] ho ὁ - Art-NMS
4100 [e] pisteuōn πιστεύων believing V-PPA-NMS
1519 [e] eis εἰς in Prep
846 [e] auton αὐτὸν him, PPro-AM3S
3361 [e] mē μὴ not Adv
622 [e] apolētai ἀπόληται should perish, V-ASM-3S

Nestle GNT 1904
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν Υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Westcott and Hort 1881
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλὰ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Westcott and Hort / [NA27 variants]
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλὰ / ἀλλ' ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

RP Byzantine Majority Text 2005
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται, ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Greek Orthodox Church 1904
Οὕτω γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Tischendorf 8th Edition
οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Scrivener's Textus Receptus 1894
Οὕτω γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται, ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ' ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον

you can sort these out ben...from bible hub