What must it be like -- to be wrong on a doctrinal POV?

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Here's shown the same ignorance and lack of understanding shown in other ongoing threads:

"It is the judgment of the sheep and goats Matt 25 at the end of the tribulation prior to the 1000 year reign of Christ." (Whose else but BR's?)

The whole era of 'The Tribulation', is the whole era of 'The Thousand Years', the whole era of Christ's reign and of the saints with Him on thrones of grace.
The tribulation as such though, fluctuated through THIS history. The greatest ever has been that of the earliest generations of Christendom, the like of which Jesus said would never recur.
For the ungodly though is waiting Rv20:6 further - THEIR judgment that day, the great day of the Lord, with the tables turned, in which God will rain down on them the fires of hell in the last judgement -- at the which ordeal God will create the earth and heavens NEW. Old Protestant, Reformed Faith.

 

[J. Jump]

Eph 2
11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "" Uncircumcision'[/b]' by the so-called "" Circumcision,'' which is performed in the flesh by human hands
12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

Now let's see - your bogus argument is that these verb tenses show it is IMPOSSIBLE for a change to take place?

How "instructive".

Clearly your argument is pigeon-holed in a corner trying to refute all of scripture based on a verb-tense argument that does not even hold in chapter 2 of Ephesians!!

But thanks for actually trying to make an argument from Eph 2 after talking about it as if you had.

in Christ,

Bob

Just as I had expected a color coded chart of NOTHING. You didn't even come close to dealing with the text that is laid out before you. And it is obvious why. You have no answer that will satisfy that Scripture. It mocks "your" theology.

Try dealing with what was said about 8-9 Bob. How does "have been saved" which is in the perfect tense, meaning one-time event that never has to be repeated the results of which last into the future, fit into your theology.

Deal with what was said and quit trying to run around the issue. That's classic of someone who's argument has run aground.

 

[J. Jump]

The judgment of the sheep and goats is a judgement of works, true.

Then eternal salvation can not be in view. It's an impossibility, because Ephesians 2:8-9 and Acts 16:30-31 tell us that works are not involved and it is only faith that is involved in eternal salvation. A judgment of works is not about eternal salvation. That judgment is passed while on this earth not when standing before The Judge.

And I am very well aware of my signature. I love that saying!

 

[BobRyan]

This bogus "past tense" arguement for "can never change" is debunked non-stop in scripture"

Gal 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Matthew 5:10
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Romans 11:31
so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy.

2 Corinthians 11:21
To my shame I must say that we have been weak by comparison But in whatever respect anyone else is bold--I speak in foolishness--I am just as bold myself.

 

[J. Jump]

This bogus "past tense" arguement for "can never change" is debunked non-stop in scripture"

The Greek doesn't contain a past tense Bob. The tense is perfect. And it can not be debunked by Scripture because that's what the Greek tense means. You can not escape that FACT of the language as much as you want to.

Just because you stick your head in the sand and pretend that it doesn't exist does not make it go away.

And just FYI Galatians 5:4 contains an aorist, passive, indicitve. Not the same type of verb, but nice try.

 

[steaver]

Here's shown the same ignorance and lack of understanding shown in other ongoing threads:

"It is the judgment of the sheep and goats Matt 25 at the end of the tribulation prior to the 1000 year reign of Christ." (Whose else but BR's?)

No, that's my post. I claim this.

The whole era of 'The Tribulation', is the whole era of 'The Thousand Years', the whole era of Christ's reign and of the saints with Him on thrones of grace.

"The Tribulation" I have in mind is the seven years spoken of in Daniel and Rev. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

Since we are discussing the pathology of a failed argument when it approaches a "deny all" status as J Jump has been demonstrating -- this example comes to mind --

J Jump

But nowhere in Scripture does it say those six days are six days of creation. God simply made a statement that He did it in verse 1. He didn't tell us how long He took.

If He did please provide the Scriptural evidence.


I know you and I don't agree on a lot of things, but this is something we do agree on. The six days talked about are six literal 24-hour days. However I find nowhere in Scripture that these six days are tied to creation.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1030724&postcount=32

Your "deny all" response above is noted J Jump

NONE are so blind as those who WILL not see! J Jump THIS goes on the "you are wrong thread" as you argument has died twice and you simply close your mind saying "you can't make me... you can't make me". That is not Bible study it is not even reason.

Genesis 2 :: New American Standard Bible (NASB)

1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts.
2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.

The "Seventh day" designation - just as we see "the sixth day" or fifth or fourth - etc.’

God states clearly that in the first SIX days of the 7 day creation week – our Creator “completed” all His work. Yet many today deny scripture on this point willingly.


Gen 2
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.



Again emphasizing the fact that God MADE and CREATED all life on earth – the sun AND the moon in those 7 days.

Exodus 20
11 "" For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

[BobRyan]

The Greek doesn't contain a past tense Bob. The tense is perfect. And it can not be debunked by Scripture because that's what the Greek tense means. You can not escape that FACT of the language as much as you want to.

As has already pointed out - -that IS the case with ALL the texts given below and they CLEARLY show that the bogus notion of "no possibility of a later change" CAN NOT be eisegeted in through a "tense" argument.

Gal 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Matthew 5:10
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[J. Jump]

Keep stickin' your head in the sand Bob. That's your choice. And your color coded text doesn't make the word "made" mean "created." Talk about blind. Boy . . . I guess maybe if you didn't have some many colors clashing with each other you could see that your "proof" text doesn't say created it said made. One could only hope.

Nice diversion by the way. Still waiting on that Ephesians 2:8-9 explanation. When will that be forthcoming?

 

[J. Jump]

As has already pointed out - -that IS the case with ALL the texts given below and they CLEARLY show that the bogus notion of "no possibility of a later change" CAN NOT be eisegeted in through a "tense" argument.

Just can't get past that can you Bob? Killer on your man-made doctrine of Bob's works huh.

The only eisegeting that is going on is YOU ignoring a text that clearly refutes "your" teachings.

The language is what it is. You simply can not change it as much as you want to.

You are only left with two choices. You can fess up to your mistake and eat some crow or you can continue in your blindness just like you talk about in your OP.

There is no other option for you. The langauge is what the language is. You can not escape that.

 

[BobRyan]

I have pointed out the utter collaps of J Jumps "argument from tense" in Eph 2 by showing that the TENSE does NOT mean "can never change" and giving prime examples of the Verb perfect tense that clearly debunks the idea of "can never change by definition".

Those who have been persecuted are not doomed to non-stop persecution.

Paul who has appeared weak in the past by comparison is NOT always doomed to appear weak by comparison.

Those who have been saved - can still suffer the "forgiveness revoked" Matt 18 "Severed from Christ" problem of the lost in Rom 11.

This shows that the GREEK itself is NOT arguing for the bogus OSAS notion - you need more than that to make your case sir.

Obviously.


Ephesians 2:5
even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ ( by grace you have been saved)

Matthew 5:10
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.


2 Corinthians 11:21
To my shame I must say that we have been weak by comparison But in whatever respect anyone else is bold--I speak in foolishness--I am just as bold myself.

The language is what it is. You simply can not change it as much as you want to.

Indeed - I have no wish to change it - since it totally debunks your proposal.

Here again you resort to a "deny everything" reponse when your argument fails.

Does it ever end??

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Gen 2
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

Keep stickin' your head in the sand Bob. That's your choice. And your color coded text doesn't make the word "made" mean "created." Talk about blind. Boy . . .

Your argument has failed here as you pretend that "created and made" does not have anything to do with created -- time after time after time.

It is left as a simple exercise for the reader to see that your "deny all approach" has once again - failed.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

But nowhere in Scripture does it say those six days are six days of creation. God simply made a statement that He did it in verse 1. He didn't tell us how long He took.

If He did please provide the Scriptural evidence.


I know you and I don't agree on a lot of things, but this is something we do agree on. The six days talked about are six literal 24-hour days. However I find nowhere in Scripture that these six days are tied to creation.

Just out of curiosity -- is there ANY READER on this thread that takes the same deny-all approach to these texts listed below as J Jump has stated in his quote above?

Gen 2
3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.



Again emphasizing the fact that God MADE and CREATED all life on earth – the sun AND the moon in those 7 days.

Exodus 20
11 "" For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

[J. Jump]

TENSE does NOT mean "can never change"

Please show me a Koine Greek resource that says the perfect tense is something that is incomplete and is changeable.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

No, that's my post. I claim this.



"The Tribulation" I have in mind is the seven years spoken of in Daniel and Rev. I'm not sure what you are talking about.

God Bless! :thumbs:

GE:

Thanks for the thumbs up "God bless" - one needs it here! I believe you mean it.

But no, I don't think of anything outside the context of Rv20 itself. In the first 5 verse of this chapter John sketches 'The Thousand Years', unmistakeably defined word for word, "This the First Resurrection". During this symbolic period, the saints "lived" having partaken in 'The First Resurrection' in and through persecution, martyrdom and witness - all of which have been their very "reign on thrones with" Christ. Therefore this period in whole constitutes the era of Christian persecution. There naturally will be varying stages of intensity of persecution. But no period limited to '7 years' in Daniel or, in revelation. Of these or of this imaginary periods or period of persecution I cannot dind anything in any of these two Books. Even if they could be recognisable, I cannot see how they possibly could be identified with the 'First-Resrucction-Thousand-Years' of Rv20.
Somewhere Isaiah denounces the drunkards' method of 'here a little there a little'. I don't want that to be my method for interpreting the Bible.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BR:
"God states clearly that in the first SIX days of the 7 day creation week – our Creator “completed” all His work. Yet many today deny scripture on this point willingly."

GE:

I also disagree with J Jump in this case; but I also cannot agree with you, in this case (as it seems impossible about everywhere else).

No, Show me this Scripture where it stans written: "in the first SIX days of the 7 day creation week – our Creator “completed” all His work."
I'll tell you what does stand there, either literally or implied: "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them; but, indeed, Rested the LORD the Seventh Day WHEREFORE the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it."
MANY times have I pointed this out to you, but you like trash sends it right to the junk tray. (Just like Bacchiocchi said he actually did with my "garbled" stuff.) God did NOT create ON the Seventh Day and therefore, blessed it. No, God RESTED the Seventh Day, thus and therefore finishing, thus and therefore blessing, and thus and therefore, sanctifying the Seventh Day.
THE SABBATH IS NOT FOR THE REMEMBRANCE OF CREATION, BUT FOR THE REMEMBRANCE OF GOD'S REST UPON IT. Which truth makes the Sabbath ESCHATOLOGICAL - explaining why NOTHING is ever heard of the Sabbath in the Scriptures again, EXCEPT and until, in a Scriptural context of SALVATION. Even in the Law, the mention of the Seventh Day never recurred but for the salvation of God. NEVER. So even in the creation-saga, the Sabbath emerges from limitless nothingness and emptiness, from timeless chaos and darkness, into the orderliness and REST of God upon the Seventh Day.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

What must it be like to be wrong on a doctrinal POV?

I and you know; intitially never nice, but embarrassing each time. But that's at first, while the ego still feels insulted and hurt.

But BobRyan won't know because he can never be wrong.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BobRyan:

"Gen 2 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."

GE:
Just change the underlining from the last clause to that before it, "because in it He rested", and you will also know how it feels, dear Bob!

 

[steaver]

(Gerhard)....But no, I don't think of anything outside the context of Rv20 itself. In the first 5 verse of this chapter John sketches 'The Thousand Years', unmistakeably defined word for word, "This the First Resurrection". During this symbolic period, the saints "lived" having partaken in 'The First Resurrection' in and through persecution, martyrdom and witness - all of which have been their very "reign on thrones with" Christ. Therefore this period in whole constitutes the era of Christian persecution. There naturally will be varying stages of intensity of persecution. But no period limited to '7 years' in Daniel or, in revelation. Of these or of this imaginary periods or period of persecution I cannot dind anything in any of these two Books. Even if they could be recognisable, I cannot see how they possibly could be identified with the 'First-Resrucction-Thousand-Years' of Rv20.
Somewhere Isaiah denounces the drunkards' method of 'here a little there a little'. I don't want that to be my method for interpreting the Bible.

I respectfully disagree with your view concerning the seven years of tribulation being within the 1000 year reign of Christ. It's really not an issue that I am willing to devote alot of time to study right now.

But you did grab my attention with...

"Somewhere Isaiah denounces the drunkards' method of 'here a little there a little'. I don't want that to be my method for interpreting the Bible".

I have always held the pov that Isaiah 28:10 was an Instruction from God's word of how God's word was to be studied and delivered to the people. You sparked my research bug into action and I have now discovered that this is not to be viewed as an instruction but rather as a negative. The teachers were basically drunkards and rather than following and teaching the people how to obey the spirit of the law they were just barking out commandments and feeding the people bits and pieces. The people were not getting anything out of their "line upon line" and "here a little, there a little". The teachers were just "bible thumpers" and lousey bible teachers.

With that said, I don't believe that Isaiah 28:10 is the same as comparing scripture to scripture and allowing scripture to interpret scripture.

The OP asked the question...."What must it be like to be wrong on a doctrinal POV?"

I have been wrong about Isaiah 28 for quite some time now and I have referenced Isaiah 28 when teaching how one should be studying scripture and building doctrine.

I HAVE BEEN WRONG about this pov and to answer the OP question....... It actually feels GREAT to know that I will not be repeating that mistake anymore. I love to learn and I love to teach others what I have learned. I take God's word very seriously and I do not want to teach God's word in error. I praise God for Gerhard mentioning Isaiah 28 which has led me to correct a doctrinal pov.

It seems that many times we accuse each other of being stubborn and determined to not change a pov. While I may seem that way in many ways I am truly always considering other's pov's. If I did not I would be doing a HUGE disservice to myself and to God. How could I continue to learn if I am closed to other possibilities? I must teach what i believe God has shown me to teach and when confronted with another pov I must thoroughly consider it. When it is not convincing I must continue on with what I have understood the scripture to teach from what I have already studied. But as in the case with Isaiah 28, when I considered another pov I found that I was in error and had no choice but to drop my pov and adopt the "new to me" one.

Now I wonder how many others have made the same mistake I have with Isaiah 28 because I referenced it many times in the wrong way and nobody ever said a word. I thank God I have learned this flaw in my teachings today (I'm sure there are more). God Bless Gerhard! (But ps brother, I don't think Isaiah 28 has anything to do with scripture interpreting scripture).

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

BR:
No, Show me this Scripture where it stans written: "in the first SIX days of the 7 day creation week – our Creator “completed” all His work."

That would be the one that keeps getting posted sir.

Read it.


"Gen 2 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."