Word-Study Fallacies/Words of Caution

[Van]

The Calvinist fallacy is to assume they can claim from means before, because that is what current Calvinist doctrine dictates. LOL

From never means before. Lexicons tell us what scholars thought was the current meaning in the period the book was written. All this mumbo jumbo is simply an effort to cloud blatant redefinitions in accordance with Calvinism.

 

[Van]

I will no more speak much with you, for the prince of the world cometh: and he hath nothing in me; Jn 14:30
Judas then, having received the band of soldiers, and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jn 18:3

And once more I must demonstrate from John 14:30, that the ruler of this world is not the ruler of the rocks and magma but of the world of fallen mankind.

John uses the Greek word Kosmos to refer to mankind in its fallen state or to the corrupt system of fallen mankind, in every case, without exception.

 

[Rippon]

John uses the Greek word Kosmos to refer to mankind in its fallen state or to the corrupt system of fallen mankind, in every case, without exception.

Then you haven't been paying attention to the Scripture kyredneck has been posting.

 

[HankD]

I look at God's sovereignty and man's free will sort of like a chess match against a master chess player.

As his opponent, you are truly moving where you choose to move under available options. You cannot just move anywhere you want, but you always have some option until you are checkmated. In this sense you are free.

At the same time, a master player can control the game from start to finish. No matter where you freely choose to move, he knows how to counter your move to keep the game in his complete control. In the end he is going to win the game.

Now, the one difference between this game of chess and God is that God already knows the moves you are going to make through foreknowledge. This does not mean your moves are determined, only foreknown. Knowing your moves ahead of time allows God to be in perfect control at all times.

At the same time, you are truly moving freely within your available options, God is not making your choices for you.

So, God can be in complete control, while we have freedom, and both can be true.

OK, but the calvinist (or so it seems to me) backs up even further in time and says

If God Did not ultimately predetermine the individual's choice beforehand then He is not sovereign.

So now I will probably be accused of not understanding calvinism even after 10 years of reading the unending debates between C and A followers.

Personally, I will agree with your model until something better surfaces because the calvinist model ultimately (in my understanding) ends up with man as a robot.

So, on the one hand, God is not sovereign or on the other hand, man is a robot.

There seems to be no third hand - or perhaps some knowledge is missing similar to the model of the orange farmer that we don't know or maybe couldn't understand even if we were told.

For now, I like to use this scripture as a connection between the two (God's sovereignty and man's responsibility).

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Robots can neither sin nor have they the power of reason yet God is sovereign.

Yes, I know - straw man argument.

HankD

 

[Reformed]

Would a moderator or administrator please close this thread I created? It has turned into an Arminianism vs Calvinism debate, something that was not intended. Thank you.

 

[Winman]

OK, but the calvinist (or so it seems to me) backs up even further in time and says

If God Did not ultimately predetermine the individual's choice beforehand then He is not sovereign.

So now I will probably be accused of not understanding calvinism even after 10 years of reading the unending debates between C and A followers.

Personally, I will agree with your model until something better surfaces because the calvinist model ultimately (in my understanding) ends up with man as a robot.

So, on the one hand, God is not sovereign or on the other hand, man is a robot.

There seems to be no third hand - or perhaps some knowledge is missing similar to the model of the orange farmer that we don't know or maybe couldn't understand even if we were told.

For now, I like to use this scripture as a connection between the two (God's sovereignty and man's responsibility).

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Robots can neither sin nor have they the power of reason yet God is sovereign.

Yes, I know - straw man argument.

HankD

Well, this is a little beyond our pay grade.

Psa 139:6 Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.

 

[Winman]

The Calvinist fallacy is to assume they can claim from means before, because that is what current Calvinist doctrine dictates. LOL

From never means before. Lexicons tell us what scholars thought was the current meaning in the period the book was written. All this mumbo jumbo is simply an effort to cloud blatant redefinitions in accordance with Calvinism.

Yeah, this is probably a subject Calvinists should not bring up.

 

[Van]

Then you haven't been paying attention to the Scripture kyredneck has been posting.

First Calvinist posts black means white.
Van posts, no, black means black.
Second Calvinist posts, you haven't been paying attention.

This is all they have, shuck and then jive.

If you read through John, you will find that it is obvious John uses kosmos to refer to mankind in its fallen state, or the corrupt system of fallen mankind. Jesus came to save the world. Now ask yourself, to save the Jews only, or first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles, to the ends of the earth.

I know many have pictured in their minds plant earth when John referred to the world, that that mindset is mistaken. The world of fallen mankind is in view.

Just read these to get the flavor of what scripture actually teaches, John 1:29; 3:17; 6:33; 7:7; 12:47; 14:31; 15:18; and 16:33.

Now I did find one verse where the planet seems to be in view, John 17:24, but even then John message certainly could be before the foundation of the world of fallen mankind.

 

[HankD]

Would a moderator or administrator please close this thread I created? It has turned into an Arminianism vs Calvinism debate, something that was not intended. Thank you.

But Reformed, while it is true that you started the thread, isn't the name of this forum Calvinism/Arminianism Debate ?

Anyway I'm game.

Goodnight.

HankD

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Closed per OP's request.