Calvinism, The fruit of scriptural truth pt3.

[Iconoclast]

Calvinists are united in the mainstream teaching of Calvinism.
There are 5 pts, not 7, not 4,3,2, or 1.
Like any biblical teaching, there are different levels of maturity or growth in grace. The teaching is found everywhere in scripture so naturally with so much to question and investigate it takes time.

Some Christians struggle with one aspect or another. It does not mean the teaching is off, the believers are off a bit.
In 2 pet3 we saw this;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood,
which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

unlearned and unstable persons;
from preceptaustin;
Unstable (793) (asteriktos from a = without + sterizo= confirm, establish) means unsettled or unsteady, describing those whose habits are not fully trained and established.

Peter has the only other NT use of asteriktos describing the influence of the false teachers who were skilled in "enticing unstable souls" (2Pe 2:14-note)

These individuals are vacillating in their spiritual character. They lack the spiritual stability and are thus unable to adhere to the moral demands of the Lordship of Christ, which conflict with their inner desires for self-indulgence.

Both "untaught" and "unstable" are united by one article which identifies a single group exhibiting both of these characteristics. These individuals take difficult passages and "wrest" them to their own ruin. Contrast Peter's description of the believers as those who had been "established" (see note 2Peter 1:12)

4761) (strebloo from strepho = twisted) means to wrench, to torment, to twist or to distort.

Herodotus used strebloo to convey the idea of to twist or wrench a dislocated limb, with a view to setting it.

This verb is used only here in the NT (and once in the Septuagint =LXX in 2Sa 22:27 and 5 times in the Apocrypha).

A stréble was a winch, an instrument that produced torture by twisting or pulling one's limbs out of joint. Thus one meaning of the verb strebloo was to put to the rack.

In one secular writing strebloo was used metaphorically to describe one who was "tortured by anxiety" and thus spoke of inward pain or torment.

BDAG writes that strebloo originally meant to…

‘twist, make taut’ of cables ("to draw the cables taut with windlasses", "to screw up the strings of an instrument"), then in various senses of wrenching dislocated limbs for the purpose of setting them, and of the use of tortuous devices in the course of inquiries (Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature)

Metaphorically, strebloo meant to pervert as one who wrests or tortures language to a false sense. Peter thus chose a singularly graphic word to picture the tortuous perversion of the Scriptures.

The untaught and unstable "twisted and tortured" the writings of Paul producing distortion and perversion of his intended meaning. It was the continual practice (strebloo is in the present tense = habitual action) of the "untaught and unstable" to take Paul's statements and twist them like victims on a rack to force them to say what they wanted them to say.

 

[Iconoclast]

Examples of this kind of people are found in several places.
I will post statements found online. I will seek to demonstrate the confused statements by merely showing how the posters exhibit a confused and double-minded outlook. There is no need to identify the posters by name. It is more important to identify the mechanisms used to deny truth.
1] I do not arrive at TULIP via Calvinistic philosophy.

Biblical Calvinists arrive at these truths as they are derived from scripture
as posted earlier;
The consistent Calvinistic apologetic is therefore presuppositional, reasoning from the Scriptures, not evidential, or reasoning to the Scriptures.
In an effort to avoid scripture some are eager to drag in a vague notion of philosophy.
2]
I do not believe that God decreed Adam to sin.That said, I do believe that Adam's sin was predestined (by God's foreknowledge), and ordained (via God's act of creation) and a part of God's plan.

Here is an example of the biblical terms misused and abused.
We have a wrong definition of foreknowledge, a wrong use of biblical predestination.

3]There is 1,2,3,4, and 5 different types because of the tulip so many only believe one to Three doctrines of grace. None of them preach the gospel of Christ. They all claim election without scriptural support. It's all Philosophical. Philosophy is not the gospel. Nor has it ever been truth.


Here we have no scripture, just accusations. The poster does not even attempt to offer a scriptural position.

 

[Iconoclast]

If a person posts they are a "Baptist" but do not believe in water baptism by immersion, are they in fact a "baptist"?

If a person says they believe in the acronym TULIP but deny the teaching of it, or redefine the words to describe teaching not held by 99% of those who profess that teaching, do they hold the teaching?

Living in a free country we can claim or profess anything we want.

We can say we have believed in something but changed our minds.

If those who actually hold the teaching examine the claims and it is obvious the person never held those truths, they are also free to point out that the claim to be whatever label is a false one.

We see people who do not want to be pinned down,
What do we mean by that?

They resist any label because in reality, they cannot defend the position. Instead, we get philosophical double talk. They suggest I believe this teaching, but not like everyone else who has ever lived. I am so unique that no one other than myself can see the truth as I do.

Some question if there are many forms of Calvinism. There are not, there is one.
What about this person, or this Pastor who suggests a different form of the teaching?
It means just that. They have left the reservation, they have veered off the mainstream. They see part of it, but are unsettled on another part and want to search it out. There is nothing wrong with that at all.
It is one thing to continue to examine scripture and gain a better understanding for yourself, as long as the person acknowledges they have for a time departed the mainstream.
It does not mean millions in the mainstream are wrong.
It means you individually cannot take in part of it.
Many struggle with the L

Others with the I.
Some with the P.
That is okay. In time they might study into it.

If they do not, that is okay if they serve God going with what they do understand. However, they should not attack the mainstream people, or belief sharing their lack of understanding.

If I say I am playing baseball on a field with no home plate and no strike zone, is it literally baseball?
You might use a bat and ball and play a game similar to stickball, but that cannot be rightly said to be baseball.

Some who are new to the faith or teaching is not going to articulate the truth the same way as a seasoned believer will.
To jump on such a person's posts and think you are showing the teaching to be in error is a move of desperation trying to rationalize your error.

 

[Iconoclast]

Communion with God has been removed from Man by sin.
Here is John Owen from his works vol2,pg 14;
By nature, since the entrance of sin, no man hath any communion with God. He is light,
1 John 1:5;
2 Corinthians 6:14;
Ephesians 5:8;
John 5:21;
Matthew 22:32;
Ephesians 2:1;
1 John 4:8;
Romans 8:7.)

we darkness;
and what communion hath light with darkness?
He is life, we are dead, —
he is love, and we are enmity; and what agreement can there be between us?
Ephesians 2:12;
Men in such a condition have neither Christ, nor hope, nor God in the world,
Eph4:18 “being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them,”
Amos3:3 Now, two cannot walk together, unless they be agreed,

Whilst there is this distance between God and man, there is no walking together for them in any fellowship or communion.

Our first interest in God was so lost by sin,
Ecclesiastes 7:29;
Jeremiah 13:23;
Acts 4:12;
Isaiah 33:14.)
as that there was left unto us (in ourselves) no possibility of a recovery.
As we had deprived ourselves of all power for a return, so God had not revealed any way of access unto himself; or that he could, under any consideration, be approached unto by sinners in peace. Not any work that God had made, not any attribute that he had revealed, could give the least light into such a dispensation. The manifestation of grace and pardoning mercy, which is the

 

[Iconoclast]

The manifestation of grace and pardoning mercy, which is the only door of entrance into any such communion, is not committed unto any but unto him alone f5 in whom it is, by whom that grace and mercy was purchased, through whom it is dispensed, who reveals it from the bosom of the Father. Hence this communion and fellowship with God is not in express terms mentioned in the Old Testament. The thing itself is found there; but the clear light of it, and the boldness of faith in it, is discovered in the gospel, and by the Spirit administered therein. By that Spirit we have this liberty,
2 Corinthians 3:17,18.

Abraham was the friend of God,
Isaiah 41:8; David, a man after his own heart;
Enoch walked with him, Genesis 5:22; — all enjoying this communion and fellowship for the substance of it. But the way into the holiest was not yet made manifest whilst the first tabernacle was standing, Hebrews 9:8.

Though they had communion with God, yet they had not parjrJhsi>an, — a boldness and confidence in that communion.
This follows the entrance of our High Priest into the most holy place, Hebrews 4:16, 10:19. The veil also was upon them, that they had not ejleuqeri> an freedom and liberty in their access to God, 2 Corinthians 3:15,16, etc.
But now in Christ we have boldness and access with confidence to God, Ephesians 3:12.

This boldness and access with confidence the saints of old were not acquainted with. By Jesus Christ alone, then, on all considerations as to being and full manifestation, is this distance taken away. He hath consecrated for us a new and living way (the old being quite shut up), “through the veil, that is to say, his flesh,” Hebrews 10:20;

and “through him we have access by one Spirit unto the Father,” Ephesians 2:18. “Ye who sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ, for he is our peace,” etc., verses 13,14.

Of this foundation of all our communion with God, more afterward, and at large. Upon this new bottom and foundation, by this new and living way, are sinners admitted unto communion with God, and have fellowship with him. And truly, for sinners to have fellowship with God, the infinitely holy God, is an astonishing dispensation.
To speak a little of it in general: — Communion relates to things and persons. A joint participation in any thing whatever, good or evil, f8 duty or enjoyment, nature or actions, gives this denomination to them so partaking of it. A common interest in the same nature gives all men a fellowship or communion therein. Of the elect it is said, Ta< paidi>a kekoinw>nhke sarkoHebrews 2:14, “Those children partook of” (or had fellowship in, with the rest of the world) “flesh and blood,” — the same common nature with the rest of mankind; and, therefore, Christ also came into the same fellowship: Kai< aujtowv uete>sce tw~n aujtw~n, There is also a communion as to state and condition, whether it be good or evil; and this, either in things internal and spiritual, — such as is the communion of saints among themselves; or in respect of outward things. So was it with Christ and the two thieves, as to one condition, and to one of them in respect of another. They were ejn tw~| kri>mati, — under the same sentence to the cross, Luke 23:40, “ejusdem doloris socii.'

They had communion as to that evil condition whereunto they were adjudged; and one of them requested (which he also obtained) a participation in that blessed condition whereupon our Savior was immediately to enter. There is also a communion or fellowship in actions, whether good or evil. In good, is that communion and fellowship in the gospel, or in the performance and celebration of that worship of God which in the gospel is instituted; which the saints do enjoy, Philippians 1:5; which, as to the general kind of it, David so rejoices in, Psalm 42:4.

 

[Iconoclast]

A lack of communion with God is evidenced by prayerlessness and a corresponding inability to welcome Divine truth. We see that quite often in the public arena.
Grace is not understood properly and even is mocked.

Owen again;
Now, of the things which have been delivered this is the sum: — there is no grace whereby our souls go forth unto God, no act of divine worship yielded unto him, no duty or obedience performed, but they are distinctly directed unto Father, Son, and Spirit. Now, by these and such like ways as these, do we hold communion with God; and therefore we have that communion distinctly, as hath been described.
This also may farther appear, if we consider how distinctly the persons of the Deity are revealed to act in the communication of those good things,
25 wherein the saints have communion with God. f19 As all the spiritual ascendings of their souls are assigned unto them respectively, so all their internal receivings of the communications of God unto them are held out in such a distribution as points at distinct rises and fountains (though not of being in themselves, yet) of dispensations unto us. Now this is declared two ways: — (1.) When the same thing is, at the same time, ascribed jointly and yet distinctly to all the persons in the Deity, and respectively to each of them. So are grace and peace, <660104>Revelation 1:4,5, “Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness,” etc.
The seven Spirits before the throne, are the Holy Spirit of God, considered as the perfect fountain of every perfect gift and dispensation. All are here joined together, and yet all mentioned as distinguished in their communication of grace and peace unto the saints. “Grace and peace be unto you, from the Father, and from,” etc. (2.) When the same thing is attributed severally and singly unto each person. There is, indeed, no gracious influence from above, no illapse of light, life, love, or grace upon our hearts, but proceedeth in such a dispensation. I shall give only one instance, which is very comprehensive, and may be thought to comprise all other particulars; and this is TEACHING. The teaching of God is the real communication of all and every particular emanation from himself unto the saints whereof they are made partakers. That promise, “They shall be all taught of God,” inwraps in itself the whole mystery of grace, as to its actual dispensation unto us, so far as we may be made real possessors of it. Now this is assigned, —

 

[Iconoclast]

NETBible: Ephesians 1:3-14

Eph 1:3-14 comprises one long sentence in Greek, with three major sections. Each section ends with a note of praise for God (vv. 6, 12, 14), focusing on a different member of the Trinity. After an opening summary of all the saints’ spiritual blessings (v. 3), the first section (vv. 4-6) offers up praise that the Father has chosen us in eternity past; the second section (vv. 7-12) offers up praise that the Son has redeemed us in the historical past (i.e., at the cross); the third section (vv. 13-14) offers up praise that the Holy Spirit has sealed us in our personal past, at the point of conversion.

2 tn There is no verb in the Greek text; either the optative (“be”) or the indicative (“is”) can be supplied. The meaning of the term εὐλογητός (euloghtos), the author’s intention at this point in the epistle, and the literary genre of this material must all come into play to determine which is the preferred nuance. εὐλογητός as an adjective can mean either that one is praised or that one is blessed, that is, in a place of favor and benefit. The meaning “blessed” would be more naturally paired with an indicative verb here and would suggest that blessedness is an intrinsic part of God’s character. The meaning “praised” would be more naturally paired with an optative verb here and would suggest that God ought to be praised. Pauline style in the epistles generally moves from statements to obligations, expressing the reality first and then the believer’s necessary response, which would favor the indicative. However, many scholars regard Eph 1:3-14 as a berakah psalm (cf. A. T. Lincoln, Ephesians [WBC], 10-11). Rooted in the OT and Jewish worship, berakah psalms were songs of praise in which the worshiper gave praise to God; this would favor the optative (although not all scholars are agreed on this genre classification here; see H. W. Hoehner, Ephesians, 153-59, for discussion and an alternate conclusion). When considered as a whole, although a decision is difficult, the indicative seems to fit all the factors better. The author seems to be pointing to who God is and what he has done for believers in this section; the indicative more naturally fits that emphasis. Cf. also 2 Cor 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3.

3 tn Or “enriched,” “conferred blessing.”

4 tn Grk “just as.” Eph 1:3-14 are one long sentence in Greek that must be broken up in English translation. Verse 4 expresses the reason why God the Father is blessed (cf. BDAG 494 s.v. καθώς 3).

5 tn Grk “in him.”

6 sn The Greek word translated unblemished (ἀμώμους, amwmous) is often used of an acceptable paschal lamb. Christ, as our paschal lamb, is also said to be unblemished (Heb 9:14; 1 Pet 1:19). Since believers are in Christ, God views them positionally and will make them ultimately without blemish as well (Jude 24; Eph 5:27; Col 1:22).

7 tn Grk “before him.”

8 tn The prepositional phrase ἐν ἀγάπῃ (en agaph, “in love”) may modify one of three words or phrases: (1) “chose,” (2) “holy and unblemished,” both in v. 4, or (3) “by predestining” in v. 5. If it modifies “chose,” it refers to God’s motivation in that election, but this option is unlikely because of the placement of the prepositional phrase far away from the verb. The other two options are more likely. If it modifies “holy and unblemished,” it specifies that our holiness cannot be divorced from love. This view is in keeping with the author’s use of ἀγάπη to refer often to human love in Ephesians, but the placement of the prepositional phrase not immediately following the words it modifies would be slightly awkward. If it modifies “by predestining” (v. 5), again the motivation of God’s choice is love. This would fit the focus of the passage on God’s gracious actions toward believers, but it could be considered slightly redundant in that God’s predestination itself proves his love.

9 tn Grk “by predestining.” Verse 5 begins with an aorist participle dependent on the main verb in v. 4 (“chose”).

sn By predestining. The aorist participle may be translated either causally (“because he predestined,” “having predestined”) or instrumentally (“by predestining”). A causal nuance would suggest that God’s predestination of certain individuals prompted his choice of them. An instrumental nuance would suggest that the means by which God’s choice was accomplished was by predestination. The instrumental view is somewhat more likely in light of normal Greek syntax (i.e., an aorist participle following an aorist main verb is more likely to be instrumental than causal).

10 tn Grk “to himself” after “through Jesus Christ.”

11 tn The Greek term υἱοθεσία (Juioqesia) was originally a legal technical term for adoption as a son with full rights of inheritance. BDAG 1024 s.v. notes, “a legal t.t. of ‘adoption’ of children, in our lit., i.e. in Paul, only in a transferred sense of a transcendent filial relationship between God and humans (with the legal aspect, not gender specificity, as major semantic component).” Although some modern translations remove the filial sense completely and render the term merely “adoption” (cf. NAB, ESV), the retention of this component of meaning was accomplished in the present translation by the phrase “as…sons.”

sn Adoption as his sons is different from spiritual birth as children. All true believers have been born as children of God and will be adopted as sons of God. The adoption is both a future reality, and in some sense, already true. To be adopted as a son means to have the full rights of an heir. Thus, although in the ancient world, only boys could be adopted as sons, in God’s family all children – both male and female – are adopted.

12 tn Or “good pleasure.”

13 tn Or “to the praise of his glorious grace.” Many translations translate δόξης τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ (doxh" th" carito" autou, literally “of the glory of his grace”) with τῆς χάριτος as an attributed genitive (cf., e.g., NIV, NRSV, ESV). The translation above has retained a literal rendering in order to make clear the relationship of this phrase to the other two similar phrases in v. 12 and 14, which affect the way one divides the material in the passage.

14 tn Grk “the beloved.” The term ἠγαπημένῳ (hgaphmenw) means “beloved,” but often bears connotations of “only beloved” in an exclusive sense. “His dearly loved Son” picks up this connotation.

sn God’s grace can be poured out on believers only because of what Christ has done for them. Hence, he bestows his grace on us because we are in his dearly loved Son.

Ephesians 1:3-14 is One Sentence in Greek: Where to Start

 

[Iconoclast]

In Christ: In One Sentence

It’s well known that Ephesians 1:3-14 is one long sentence in Greek. The following is from the ESV but I’ve made some of the pronouns more explicit to highlight the way in which Paul sees the Christian life—from before the foundation of the world to eternity—as bound up with the idea of union with Christ.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.

In love God predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.

In Christ we have redemption through Christ’s blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth.

In Christ we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.

In Christ you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in Christ, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

 

[Iconoclast]

Grace is a Gift | Ephesians 1:3-14

Today’s text, Ephesians 1:3-14 in the original Greek is one long continuous sentence in which Paul describes the blessings we have in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. A blessing is a gift. A blessing is anything good we receive from God. In this passage Paul explains three gifts we receive from God, the first of which is the most controversial. Grace is a gift and the first gift we receive is this…


Punctuating the Bible - The Aquila Report

Punctuating the Bible
Written by Ben Shaw | Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Thus, for example, Ephesians 1:3-14 (one extended sentence in Greek) is divided into three sentences by the KJV, and up to fourteen or so sentences by some of the modern simple language translations. But this punctuation is a matter of editorial choice.

The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic (the Aramaic portions are as follows: Ezra 4:8-6:18; 7:11-26; Daniel 2:4-7:28; Jeremiah 10:11, and two words in Genesis 31:47). The New Testament was written in Greek.

The original Hebrew (and Aramaic) manuscripts were written without vowels and without punctuation. The fact that vowels were not written is not as problematic as it might seem, due to the character of the Hebrew language. In fact, most Modern Hebrew is also written without vowels. Vowels are inserted only when necessary to prevent possible misunderstandings.

At least in the Hebrew manuscripts, the scribes did have spaces between words. For an example of such Hebrew manuscripts, see http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/sacredtexts/images/deadseascrolls_lg.jpg.

The earliest Greek manuscripts were written in all capital letters (called uncials), and were written without spaces between the words but with some punctuation, though the punctuation seems not to have been used consistently. For an example of such a manuscript, see http://www.bible-researcher.com/papy66big.jpg.

In the Middle Ages, Greek manuscripts began to be written in a cursive script called miniscules. These manuscripts at least had spaces between the words, and a more sustained use of punctuation. For an example, see http://www.greekingout.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/ntmanuscript.jpg. [Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]

Over the course of the Middle Ages, the Hebrew scribes that preserved and copied the biblical text developed a system for indicating the vowels in each word. These scribes are known as Masoretes, and the text they produced is the Masoretic text. In addition to this vocalization system, they developed a system of accents for the text.

In this system, each word has its own accent. The accents serve three purposes. First, the accent indicates which syllable in the word is accented. Second, the accents serve as a sort of musical notation, indicating how the text is to be chanted. Third, the accents serve somewhat like punctuation. This system is still found in modern printed editions of the Hebrew Bible.

The punctuation in modern editions of the Greek New Testament comes in part from the punctuation found in manuscripts. In addition, punctuation is added by the editors of the Greek text.

The punctuation of English versions of the Bible is dependent in part on the punctuation indicated by the Hebrew accent system and on the punctuation of the Greek text. However punctuation in English is different and more extensive than punctuation in either Hebrew or Greek. Thus, the punctuation of English versions is determined by the translators and editors of the particular version.

Thus, for example, Ephesians 1:3-14 (one extended sentence in Greek) is divided into three sentences by the KJV, and up to fourteen or so sentences by some of the modern simple language translations. But this punctuation is a matter of editorial choice.

 

[utilyan]

we must be aware of the pesky truth suppressors who seek to undermine confidence in both the scriptures and those faithful men who teach it.

By "Pesky Truth Suppressor" you mean God Almighty, correct?

Because in actuality you believe he GOD ALONE suppresses all truth from everyone.

 

[Iconoclast]

By "Pesky Truth Suppressor" you mean God Almighty, correct?

Because in actuality you believe he GOD ALONE suppresses all truth from everyone.

Another profane ignorant post void of content.
Yet everyone is free to mock and scoff God and His word. You will give an account of every idle word.

 

[Dave G]

By "Pesky Truth Suppressor" you mean God Almighty, correct?

No, he doesn't.

Because in actuality you believe he GOD ALONE suppresses all truth from everyone.

Would it interest you to know that the Bible does indeed teach that God hides Himself from many, and reveals Himself to others?

" At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]." ( Matthew 11:25-27 ).

If the Father chooses to allow His Son to reveal Him to some and not all, is that not suppressing the truth from those who seek it?


" When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some [say that thou art] John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." ( Matthew 16:13-17 ).

If the Father chooses to reveal that Jesus is the Christ to some and not to others, does that make Him unjust?
Is He not righteous by choosing to reveal Himself and His Son to some and not to others?
Choosing to save some and not others?
Choosing to give gifts to some, and withhold those gifts from others?


God does as He wills in the armies of Heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth ( Daniel 4:35 ).
None can stay His hand, or say, "what are you doing?".


Lastly,
is God beholden to you or to me, to do what we expect Him to do,
or to reveal Himself to people who aren't looking for Who He is, but who we want Him to be?

He very plainly said, "I AM THAT I AM." ( Exodus 3:14 ).

 

[Iconoclast]

Douglas Moo,Romans pg119

This passage divides into three main parts. In the first (vv. 18-20), Paul announces the "revelation" of God's wrath and explains why that wrath is justified: people commit ungodly and unrighteous acts, "suppressing" the truth (v. 18).

Paul can accuse people of suppressing the truth because God has given people a knowledge of himself (w. 19-20a); therefore, when they sin, they are "without excuse" (v. 20b).

The second section, vv. 21-31, describes in more detail the ways in which people have suppressed the truth of God and draws out some of their consequences. Paul uses three generally parallel "retribution" sequences to make his point:14 Vv. 21-24:

People "exchange"15 the truth of God for idols —God "hands them over"16 Vv. 25-26a:

People "exchange" the truth of God for a lie — God "hands them over" Vv. 26b-31:

People "exchange" natural sexual practices for the unnatural — God "hands them over "

 

[utilyan]

Another profane ignorant post void of content.
Yet everyone is free to mock and scoff God and His word. You will give an account of every idle word.

Sounds like when you can't sugar coat your "TRUTH" you get upset.

Who decides whether truth is suppressed or not?

 

[Iconoclast]

Sounds like when you can't sugar coat your "TRUTH" you get upset.

Who decides whether truth is suppressed or not?

All truth belongs to God.Are you a roman catholic?
Your posts lack biblical clarity like 90% of roman catholic people.
Are you a professed Christian?

 

[utilyan]

All truth belongs to God.Are you a roman catholic?
Your posts lack biblical clarity like 90% of roman catholic people.
Are you a professed Christian?

That's right its God. I just wanted you to straighten that fact out. No one can suppress anything from God.

If he wills it its so.

 

[Iconoclast]

Log into Facebook

 

[Brightfame52]

icon

Grace is a Gift | Ephesians 1:3-14

Today’s text, Ephesians 1:3-14 in the original Greek is one long continuous sentence in which Paul describes the blessings we have in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. A blessing is a gift. A blessing is anything good we receive from God. In this passage Paul explains three gifts we receive from God, the first of which is the most controversial. Grace is a gift and the first gift we receive is this…

Yes Grace is a Gift Eph 3:7


Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

And its operative !

Its received because its given sovereignly.

It reigns through righteousness Rom 5:21

That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[ad finitum]

We have declared several things to keep in mind from threads 1 and 2;

The consistent Calvinistic apologetic is therefore presuppositional, reasoning from the Scriptures, not evidential, or reasoning to the Scriptures.

What man needs is spiritual life, enablement and perception [regeneration], not merely information.

This seems contrary to, "Faith comes by hearing." What is one to hear if not "information"?

 

[Brightfame52]

This seems contrary to, "Faith comes by hearing." What is one to hear if not "information"?

Faith does come by hearing, but where does hearing come from ? Jesus said Jn 8:47

47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

To be of God is to be born of God, thats who hears resulting in faith