Appointed To Eternal Life?

[Van]

You are being misleading about the word appointed/ordained in Acts 13:48

You are being misleading about "tasso" in Acts 13:48. I provided the evidence, the word is always used to indicate an arrangement by mutual consent. Calvinists even falsely claimed I did not present the evidence of post #146.

The Gentiles gladly accepted what the Jews (Acts 13:46( rejected. An arrangement by mutual consent, not by divine decree.

 

[Brightfame52]

You are being misleading about "tasso" in Acts 13:48. I provided the evidence, the word is always used to indicate an arrangement by mutual consent. Calvinists even falsely claimed I did not present the evidence of post #146.

The Gentiles gladly accepted what the Jews (Acts 13:46( rejected. An arrangement by mutual consent, not by divine decree.

False, the word has absolutely nothing to do with mutual consent. You have flagrantly interjected that, its called handling the word of God deceitfully. In fact these Gentiles were ordained to eternal life b4 they had a being. On top of that, their believing in time at Paul's preaching showed they already had eternal life in them, the Gospel brings life to light 2 Tim 1:9-10

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,

10 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:

 

[Van]

False, the word has absolutely nothing to do with mutual consent. You have flagrantly interjected that, its called handling the word of God deceitfully. In fact these Gentiles were ordained to eternal life b4 they had a being. On top of that, their believing in time at Paul's preaching showed they already had eternal life in them, the Gospel brings life to light 2 Tim 1:9-10

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,

10 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:

Note how JOJ's post is ignored? I quoted well recognized scholars, provided in JOJ's post. While I am injecting nothing, Calvinism is injecting falsehood, deceitfully handling the word of God. And note how they charge their opponents with whatever evil they are practicing. This is an effort to change the subject away from scripture, such as provided in post #146.

Next we have the mutilated interpretation of 2 Timothy 1:9. When was the Lamb of God chosen? Before the foundation of the world. What was His purpose? To redeem fallen sinners. Was this plan an act of grace? Yes. Thus every redeemed child of God was given that grace before humanity began.

There is absolutely no support for four of the five false doctrines of Calvinism anywhere in the bible contextually considered. None.

 

[Brightfame52]

Note how JOJ's post is ignored? I quoted well recognized scholars, provided in JOJ's post. While I am injecting nothing, Calvinism is injecting falsehood, deceitfully handling the word of God. And note how they charge their opponents with whatever evil they are practicing. This is an effort to change the subject away from scripture, such as provided in post #146.

Next we have the mutilated interpretation of 2 Timothy 1:9. When was the Lamb of God chosen? Before the foundation of the world. What was His purpose? To redeem fallen sinners. Was this plan an act of grace? Yes. Thus every redeemed child of God was given that grace before humanity began.

There is absolutely no support for four of the five false doctrines of Calvinism anywhere in the bible contextually considered. None.

Note how you have corrupted the word of God, talking about "ordained" is a mutual agreement. Is human government ordained by God a mutual agreement ? When did they decide to agree with God ?

 

[John of Japan]

I'm not sure what is being asked or argued here. I had to go back and search just to see what the verse was! I have a busy day today grading (not that fun) and then teaching (fun!), but I came early so I can spend a few minutes (but I can't take time to read the whole thread). So the verse in question is Acts 13:48, right? The verb is tasso (τάσσω) and the form is tetagmenoi (τεταγμένοι) as said. It's a perfect passive participle in the nominative case. Since it's nominative, I'd say it's the subject of the sentence.

My go to quick reference lexicon says, "passive, in relation to properly constituted authority be instituted, be appointed, be established (RO 13.1); (2) passive, with an abstract noun ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον as many as had become disposed toward eternal life (possibly AC 13.48) or all those who were appointed to eternal life (probably AC 13.48)" (Friberg, Friberg & Miller, Analytical Lexicon of the Greek NT).

A. T. Robertson, my favorite old time Greek scholar, says, "Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of tassô, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word 'ordain' is not the best translation here. 'Appointed,' as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an absolutum decretum of personal salvation" (Word Pictures in the NT, accessed through PowerBible CD software).

So, I'm thinking the participle here should be translated middle voice instead of passive, since I don't see an agent (ὑπο + genitive, or a dative noun,), which is normal for a passive, such as "by God" (ὑπο του θεου, τῳ θεῳ). So, if it's the middle, it would be "disposed of themselves," per the Friberg and Miller definition.

 

[Van]

Note how you have corrupted the word of God, talking about "ordained" is a mutual agreement. Is human government ordained by God a mutual agreement ? When did they decide to agree with God ?

On and on these posters run from scripture, See post #146 folks, the case is made from scripture that tasso is used in scripture to indicate an arrangement by mutual consent. Also see post #e165 from JOJ.

 

[37818]

As per the scriptures you cited, the question is, is everyone able to will themselves to conversion, to come to Christ in child-like faith?

No. Those three passages are about either entering the Kingdom being a little child or the new birth. As explained by Jesus to Nicodemus. John 3:3-7.

 

[Silverhair]

I still don't see any room in the text to add this idea that He is the propitiation for every person in the whole world and it will only be applied when a person cooperates with God and chooses to come to faith. What I see is that He is the propitiation and it is applied right now without anybody's cooperation.

Now how do I know John isn't talk about every person in the whole world?

Because of the verse that came before...

1 John 2:1 - My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

John is writing to believers (the you in this verse). So this must be speaking of believers out of the whole world, not every person in the whole world. But let's say for the sake of argument that it is speaking of the every person in the whole world. Every lost person right now, even though they haven't chosen to come to faith yet, do they have an advocate with the Father and in what way? If a person chooses remains lost, was Jesus' advocation a waste of time? If unbelief is a sin and Jesus advocated for that sin, then why bother coming to faith because it's already been taken care of? When we ask questions like this we see why it just doesn't work.

Yes he is writing to believers but then he also includes the whole world or do you think "whole world" has a different meaning?

1Jn 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;
1Jn 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

We see in verse 1 that the "you" refers back to the "My little children".
We see in verse 2 that the "our" also refers back to those same "My little children" and includes John also.
So we know that Christ was the propitiation for the sins of John and those included in the "My little children".

Then we are told that the propitiation was "not for ours only" BUT "also for those of the whole world."

Where you error is in your understanding of what propitiation means. It does not means that Christ by His death on the cross has saved anyone. The bible is clear that we are only saved by the grace of God through faith.

Hilasmós, found only in 1Jn_2:2 and 1Jn_4:10, is equivalent to hilastḗrion (G2435) as used by Paul in Rom_3:25. It is the means of putting away sin and establishing righteousness. God is never presented as changing His mind toward the sinner or the sin that estranged the sinner from Him. WSD Complete Word Study Dictionary

Rom 3:25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;
Rom 3:26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Christ was the atonement or atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage his wrath and render him propitious to sinners.

Is unbelief a sin, yes. And just like any other sin it is only forgiven when the person places their trust/faith in the risen Christ Jesus. If Christ be not risen, you have no evidence of God’s having accepted His mediation for you, nor, consequently, of your being justified.
1Co 15:17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
Rom 4:25 He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.
Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

 

[Brightfame52]

On and on these posters run from scripture, See post #146 folks, the case is made from scripture that tasso is used in scripture to indicate an arrangement by mutual consent. Also see post #e165 from JOJ.

Rom 13:1

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

The powers that be can be ordained of God if they mutually agree! lol

 

[Brightfame52]

Matt 28:16

Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them

Well Jesus you appointed theminto a mountain if they mutually agree with you

 

[Rye]

So, I'm thinking the participle here should be translated middle voice instead of passive, since I don't see an agent (ὑπο + genitive, or a dative noun,), which is normal for a passive, such as "by God" (ὑπο του θεου, τῳ θεῳ). So, if it's the middle, it would be "disposed of themselves," per the Friberg and Miller definition.

Thank you for your insight, John, and I trust that your interpretation is accurate.

As I pointed out in the OP, our mainstream Bible translations have consistently translated “tetagmenoi/tasso” as “appointed/ordained/chosen”, however there is no clear consensus among Greek scholars as to whether or not this should be a middle or passive verb.

Interestingly enough, the only English translation that I have found that does translate it as “disposed” is the New World Translation used by the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

 

[Brightfame52]

So, I'm thinking the participle here should be translated middle voice instead of passive, since I don't see an agent (ὑπο + genitive, or a dative noun,), which is normal for a passive, such as "by God" (ὑπο του θεου, τῳ θεῳ). So, if it's the middle, it would be "disposed of themselves," per the Friberg and Miller definition.

So it would be spiritually dead sinners, in darkness and ignorance, ordained themselves to eternal life and believed. Incredible for spiritual dead sinners to do, dispose themselves to eternal life.

 

[John of Japan]

So it would be spiritually dead sinners, in darkness and ignorance, ordained themselves to eternal life and believed. Incredible for spiritual dead sinners to do, dispose themselves to eternal life.

Well, now, you completely left out the Holy Spirit. I certainly don't believe what you wrote here in the slightest. That's called a straw man argument in logic, as you should already know.

Look, I exegeted the Greek. What is your considered opinion of the Greek?

 

[John of Japan]

Thank you for your insight, John, and I trust that your interpretation is accurate.

As I pointed out in the OP, our mainstream Bible translations have consistently translated “tetagmenoi/tasso” as “appointed/ordained/chosen”, however there is no clear consensus among Greek scholars as to whether or not this should be a middle or passive verb.

Interestingly enough, the only English translation that I have found that does translate it as “disposed” is the New World Translation used by the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Even a broken clock can be right twice in a day.

 

[Brightfame52]

Well, now, you completely left out the Holy Spirit. I certainly don't believe what you wrote here in the slightest. That's called a straw man argument in logic, as you should already know.

Look, I exegeted the Greek. What is your considered opinion of the Greek?

You left out the Holy Spirit. Im saying God ordained them to eternal life, The Holy Spirit is God as well. You are clamoring for the middle voice, where the they acted upon themselves. Im saying they were passive, being acted upon.

 

[John of Japan]

You left out the Holy Spirit. Im saying God ordained them to eternal life, The Holy Spirit is God as well. You are clamoring for the middle voice, where the they acted upon themselves. Im saying they were passive, being acted upon.

The way in which you left out the Holy Spirit is how He convicts (John 16:8-10). That changes the whole equation. Calvinists very rarely deal with how the Holy Spirit convicts the sinner. I just was checking my Calvinist systematic theologies (Hodge, Strong, Berkhof), and none of them deal with the Holy Spirit's conviction. Once the Calvinist admits that the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, he must then decide the extent of that conviction. John said "the world."

Now, concerning my Greek exegesis, please abandon the rhetoric and sensibly discuss it, telling me how you know who the agent was in that passage.

 

[Van]

What does Acts 13:48 say?


Act 13:48

When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and all who had been appointed to eternal life believed.

The Greek word, translated as "appointed" is "tasso" (G5021). The word appears in eight verses and is always used to indicate people accepting direction or an arrangement, rather than an unilateral placement.

Calvinists beat this dead horse incessantly, because they actually do not know what the word means in context.

In Matthew 28:16 the disciples chose to follow Christ's direction and went to the place "designated" (tasso) by Jesus.

In Luke 7:8 soldiers choose to follow the directions of their superior.

In Acts 15:2 Paul and others agree to take the direction to go to Jerusalem.

In Acts 22:10 Paul is told to go to Damascus where he will be told what is designated for his to do.

In Acts 28:23, A day is designated for Paul to preach and Paul follows that direction.

In Romans 13:1, governments are designated or arranged by God.

And in 1 Corinthians 15:16 people devoted (committed) themselves to ministry.

So the word is actually used in every case to indicate an arrangement by mutual agreement, not an unilateral action.

Therefore the actual message of Acts 13:48 is all those who accepted Paul's direction to eternal life believed. This is not rocket science. It does not matter whether "tasso" is in the middle or passive voice, Paul's direction was given to them (passive) and they followed the direction and believed (middle). The usages is always the same, direction is given and then followed.

Calvinism is built on mis-interpreting vague verses in order to pour man-made doctrine into the text.
Among these are 1 Corinthians 2:14, Romans 3:11, Ephesians 1:4,and Acts 13:48.

 

[Van]

TLB
When the Gentiles heard this, they were very glad and rejoiced in Paul’s message; and as many as wanted eternal life, believed.

The issue that more than most English translations translate "tasso" as "appointed" does not suggest whether or not the appointment was made unilaterally or by mutual agreement, i.e. the Gentiles took Paul's direction. Thus the vague translation choice provides the opportunity for misinterpretation, if the context is ignored.

 

[Brightfame52]

@John of Japan

The way in which you left out the Holy Spirit is how He convicts (John 16:8-10)

Thats describing regeneration activity, so yes the ones in Acts 13:48 who believe were already regenerated in order to Glorify the word of the Lord Acts 13:48

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

A spiritually dead sinner cant hear the word spiritually and glorify the word, impossible.

 

[John of Japan]

@John of Japan



Thats describing regeneration activity, so yes the ones in Acts 13:48 who believe were already regenerated in order to Glorify the word of the Lord Acts 13:48

Look again. John 16 specifically says that the conviction comes to those who do not believe, not as part of regeneration: "Of sin, because they believe not on me" (v. 9). So you can't properly say that conviction comes as part of regeneration. I'm open to Scriptural proof, but you don't provide any, you just make bald statements we are supposed to agree with.

And making conviction part of regeneration is a non-starter. The definitions of the words (Greek and English) are completely different. So, any actual Scripture to prove your point. or even a quote from a reputable theologian that says conviction is part of regeneration?

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

A spiritually dead sinner cant hear the word spiritually and glorify the word, impossible.

I already dealt with v. 48, and you have not answered my point that if it is passive, what is the agent?

Is this the best you can do? This is typical average Calvinism. I have lots to do, so unless you can come up with some real meat I have to go. I'll check in the morning to see if you have any theology to offer (instead of bald, unproven statements).