Plain, Simple, Un-adulterated Easy to Understand Truth

I agree, thats why I disagreed with gordon, which is what you quoted from me, disagreeing with his interpetation, taking his interpetation to it's logical end, which it seems he has not thought out.

His own would be the jews, because Jesus was a jew. He came to His own (the jews) when He was born, when He started preaching.

 

Fatalist!!! :tongue3:

 

Thats right, you choose your baby for adoption, your choose your pet, and you did not disown them when they did wrong, your thoughts support eternal salvation(can not loose salvation), not free will.
Becasue you see, throwing food, or pooping on the carpet have nothing to do with them choosing not to be yours (child and pet), their disagreeable actions are after the fact.

 

What can I say brother? I died to myself and started trusting Jesus! That is fatalism isn't it?:applause:

 

Fair enough, donnA. I totally agree.

I have recently had a strong dose of "God makes us do everything we do, yes, even the bad things". It was not an argument for freewill, it was an argument against God being the author of sin, and people being puppets. Sorry, wrong thread.

 

Amen!!! Ain't it great to be saved?

I am so glad that Jesus loves me, Jesus loves me, Jesus loves me!!!

 

I would like to start in verse 1, for there is a key point there. But I will address that later.

For now, lets take it slow...please stay with me.

Your 1st set of verses..

In verse 4 we have the word life, (zwh). Do you feel there is a logical link to "logos" in verse one in that it is speaking 1st of creation? I also know that it has mean other meanings, but we will get to that later. Now this may mean nothing to you yet, but stay with me please.

would you agree with this statement from strongs as to the meaning?...

Next..in verse 5 we have katelaben (comprehend) in the KJV. What do you think this may mean?

Do you think it holds the same idea and meaning found in chapter 3 verse 19?

Would you agree with Strongs...

2638 katalambano {kat-al-am-ban'-o}
from 2596 and 2983; TDNT - 4:9,495; v
AV - take 3, apprehend 3, comprehend 2, come upon 1, attain 1,
find 1, overtake 1, obtain 1; 15
1) to lay hold of
1a) to lay hold of so as to make one's own, to obtain, attain to,
to make one's own, to take into one's self, appropriate
1b) to seize upon, take possession of
1b1) of evils overtaking one, of the last day overtaking the
wicked with destruction, of a demon about to torment one
1b2) in a good sense, of Christ by his holy power and influence
laying hold of the human mind and will, in order to prompt
and govern it
1c) to detect, catch
1d) to lay hold of with the mind
1d1) to understand, perceive, learn, comprehend



Now to your verse.

This word "lighteth"....what does it mean in context?

5461 photizo {fo-tid'-zo}
from 5457; TDNT - 9:310,1293; v
AV - give light 2, bring to light 2, lighten 2, enlighten 2, light 1,
illuminate 1, make to see 1; 11
1) to give light, to shine
2) to enlighten, light up, illumine
3) to bring to light, render evident
3a) to cause something to exist and thus come to light and become
clear to all
4) to enlighten, spiritually, imbue with saving knowledge
4a) to instruct, to inform, teach
4b) to give understanding to

I'll be back later to see how you are doing.

 

The church I attend is sometimes typed as 'hyper-Calvinist' (which always leaves me wondering "whatever do they mean?"), and we certainly don't believe that way.

 

I used this line the other day..

Christianity Today, Baptism in Britain, Vol. 24, No. 7, April 4, 1980:

“Hyper-Calvinism is a fluid term; as one pastor notes wryly, “Everyone who is more Reformed that I am is hyper-Calvinistic.”

Hyper-Calvinism use to mean that you did not believe in missions. I have been called an HC myself. I used the lable here on freewillers, for they seem to think all Calvinst are hyper. They think their idea of foreknowing changes things, yet it does not.

BTW...nice to meet you.


In Christ...James

 

I will consider the term as placing me in some pretty good company, then. Nice to meet you, too, James.

 

Super-TULIP-Calvinistic-extra-Synod of Dort-ness

 

I gotta look up that Synod of Dort deal one day...

 

Blammo just the sound of that is something quite atrocious!

Okay yall, let's keep it going! Someone else can do the next line.

 

You would think you would know what us non cal's believe by now

Please represent what we believe accurately. You've been told enough.

 

thats fine
i agree, God is not the author of sin

 

My reply was this......and you have nothing to say????

Could it be that we have yet another blank clipboard? Come now, you must do better then this my friend. We have yet to get into the good part.

 

This thread has gone to these much pages, and Gordon Slocum has not answered my logical question to his statement about the Calvinists on this board being judged according to the Scriptures he posted.

So, I will now quote the specific verse he points to with his statement about Calvinists being judged by God:

And I am again asking the question which he does not seem able to answer:

And then what ?
The Calvinist will be sent to hell ?

Or has God appointed you, Gordon Slocum, to act in His behalf and judge all Calvinists by arguing for God about this verse ?

Please answer both questions.