Featured The Will of God in the Fall of Man II

Wrong again! I went to Mounce on Biblegateway, his reverse inter linear

 

The Mounce interlinear in biblegateway listed it as I posted take it up with Biblegateway

 

:29Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament (MOUNCE)
29 becausehoti thosehos he foreknewproginōskō he alsokai predestinedproorizō to become conformedsymmorphos to theho imageeikōn ofho hisautos Sonhyios, thateis heautos might beeimi the firstbornprōtotokos amongen manypolys brethrenadelphos. Hard to copy and paste with phone

 

I will tell you this, it doesn't mean what you make it out to mean. By your own admission you teach 'What it means to you' when discussing theology. That's unfortunate and is not Biblical, and definitely it is not following 2 Timothy 2:15. It is instead purely subjective.

Nowhere does Scripture state God chose us because of what we would do, and in fact, the believing happens from God, not from us, Romans 10:17; Acts 16:14, Ephesians 2:3; Romans 12:3, Ephesians 1:19, so to say that He chose because we chose is also unbiblical. The point is moot and doesn't follow sound doctrine.

We do know He chose us according to His own will to do so, nothing in that about us; James 1:18; 2 Timothy 1:9, Ephesians 1:1ff. That is the testimony of Scripture, and yours is not following Biblical truth.

Instead of preaching 'What this means to me is' (which has no authority whatsoever) we need to all get our teaching, all of it, from the Word alone, adding nothing to it. Unfortunately you are adding to it, and this is seen when you say 'What it means to me is___'. That is when you get off track from truth into your subjectivity.

I will also add this caveat, I'd bet you also would say that not all whom He predestinated will become like Christ 'conformed to His image' although that was one of the major reasons for His predestinating us. It will happen, it is His purpose to do so, Romans 8:29; 2 Corinthians 3:18ff.

That is also contrary to sound doctrine to say otherwise, that is that there are those who are saved that show no evidence and never grow into Christ likeness. Yet one error leads to the next, (foreknowledge, to predestination) when any teaching goes against the Word this is the path it takes.

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+8:29&version=MOUNCE

Romans 8:29Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament (MOUNCE)
29 because hoti those hos he foreknew proginōskō he also kai predestined proorizō to become conformed symmorphos to the ho image eikōn of ho his autos Son hyios, that eis he autos might be eimi the firstborn prōtotokos among en many polys brethren adelphos.

Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament (MOUNCE)
The Mounce Reverse-Interlinear™ New Testament (MOUNCE) Copyright © 2011 by Robert H. Mounce and William D. Mounce. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
“Reverse-Interlinear” is a trademark of William D. Mounce.

 

You teach what it means to you as you get from the dictionary, that note as stated was to clearify that is how I see it where most of the Calvanist on here believe it their way?

 

Where did I say what it means to me? Where did I quote a dictionary? Nowhere did I make that statement so your accusations are presumptuous and not true.

I'm trying to be patient with you, and your responses are typically incoherent as is witnessed above.

If you want true dialog, take the time to be clear in your response, showing respect for others and the time taken to address you respectfully.

Frankly your response is drivel. The thing is that you answered me immediately after I posted. I took the time to give a solid response, with Scripture and you banged out the drivel above in perfunctory fashion.

I don't care if you're on your phone doing it, take the time to show some respect for God, His Word, His teachings, your discussing His teachings and others. If you can't do that on your phone then find the time to do it at some other point. You haven't even had the time to even investigate a thing stated from the passages given in the time you responded. All you've given are false accusations above, and neither God nor I have any use or respect for that whatsoever.

I will give you one message to listen to. If you take the time to actually listen and learn I will provide more, otherwise if you continue to show disrespect and contempt, drivel ridden incoherent responses I will choose to spend my time elsewhere and with others.

Here is the link:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=823111338379

 

Never said you said anything and I have treated you and you buddies with more respect than you have ever treated me. Patience you just don't know how much patience I have shown you all. The phone statement didn't even effect any comment you made.

 

You 'never said I said anything'? That's not true. Go back and read your response (and others should as well).

My friend, I cannot accept you've treated me and 'my buddies' with more respect, in fact I see the opposite. Many and most of your responses are short, incoherent and drivel laden. Then you say you don't have time to respond, or are on your phone, as an excuse to not answer (when nailed for your error) or as to why your answer is nothing but drivel, yet after this you post a lengthy OP on another topic in another or the same forum.

In short? You're full of excuses.

From what I see (and others) you respond to a good post with an incoherent one in order to dismiss the response and make pretense to have answered. In this post you claim you never said I said anything.

That isn't even true, but it is a pattern of how you respond.

I'll leave off responding to you in the future.

 

You express your opinion on this and that as you see them. That is what I meant. Doesn't make you right. Your opinion is just that your opinion.

 

it doesn't have it in the original form of Greek. I haven't used Mounce but since others have said he is the authotlrity and vines and Strong supposedly habit incorrect I went to him. No you say he's wrong the one I normally use had a different word seems which ever I use it disagrees with you.

 

He can't so he won't. Same stuff different day. It will all be conveniently dismissed and he will carry on in error tomorrow, and so on.