Isaiah48_9

@Exodus15_11 @brandonmscalf Indeed. It has been said that: "a bible verse cannot mean what it does not say". Your point is well stated. What it "says" must be determined by its proper context. Broad & narrow. It's not (always) immediately clear to the reader.

@brandonmscalf A verse gets its MEANING from the details in the passage which allow context to be hermeneutically-derived. Let's stop playing with verses apart from their passages.

It doesn't matter what a Bible verse means to YOU. It only matters what a Bible verse ACTUALLY MEANS.

@rootcausesleuth @ReformedCaio @DustinSJenkins @Duke456521 @OllamFodhla @Benjamin_01X @DPGBehler @BornAgainBalaky @breadznfishz @JonKismetCalvin @troywojick @chess_over The OP framed the ? hypothetically. "COULD man, in his fallen state and without God’s grace, seek God and exercise saving faith that &c.". The real question is: DOES man, in his fallen state, and without God’s grace, seek God and exercise saving faith that is pleasing to God?

@ReformedCaio @DustinSJenkins @Duke456521 @OllamFodhla @Benjamin_01X @DPGBehler @BornAgainBalaky @breadznfishz @JonKismetCalvin @troywojick @chess_over I did look at them. This is so frustrating. So, they are affirming that in some other hypothetical world that is true. So? That’s why I tagged them, so they could respond to the actual issue that you still are sidestepping.

No one is without God’s grace (favor), so the question doesn’t apply to reality. All people have what it takes to seek God and find him.

@TodAshby @Phil_Johnson_ Could it be that the limiting word in this text is "world"; referring to the Roman world? Augustus did not rule over the entire planet. Could "all" refer to all, without exception, in the Roman world? BTW: I firmly believe that Jesus' atonement was relationally personal in scope.

Of course all mean all. For example: Luke 2:1 “A decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.” Every person on the planet registered. China? Yep. The Americas? Of course. Australia? Augustus had to keep track of the prisoners. Matthew 3:5 “Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region around the Jordan were going out to him.” Every single person left their house to go see John the Baptist. John 12:19 “Look, the world has gone after him.” Not technically an “all” passage, but you’ll get the point. Did every human follow Jesus? Again, China, the Americas, Australia all did. Okay, maybe all doesn’t always mean all, and we should look at the context. 🤷🏻‍♂️

"All" always means ALL. Right? teampyro.blogspot.com/2008/12/all-al…

@PracticalTheolo @Ohbs1010 re: "I've looked at John 8:58 a few times, and don't see Jesus BEING CALLED God there." I've looked at your post a few times and clearly see your slight-of-hand in falsely representing the words of the text. You won't see who Jesus is apart from God's Spirit opening your heart.

@Ohbs1010 I've looked at John 8:58 a few times, and don't see Jesus being called God there. Yet this is your *first* go-to verse to show Trinitarianism?

Neither do Trinitarians, tho'.

@Be_Like_JChrist Justification by Calvinistic rejection. That's a good one. No person who is a Calvinist now, or was--but has since died--is a "True Christian"? You are in a Satanic Cult if you really believe that. Seriously. What a wicked and godless statement. @Be_Like_JChrist = Exodus 20:7

@isaiah489 Because all true Christians reject Calvinism

Calvinist are mad that God picked a saw and rejected Jacob, this is so that Jacob would be brought to jealousy. They hate this because it destroys their narrative that God elects persons instead of people groups.

@rootcausesleuth @ronhenzel Equivocation, but I'll play along... Will you give some examples from the bible?

@isaiah489 @ronhenzel Whatever the Bible says was

No, the fall was not predetermined by God.

@Be_Like_JChrist @JosephSwar86703 The gas for your gaslighting seems to not be blocked at the Strait of Hubris. Thanks for your call though.

@isaiah489 @JosephSwar86703 Nothing of substance to your post. Nice strawman though.

It was not God‘s punishment that Jesus took upon himself. It was the punishment we poured out on him. It was our punishing him. God never punish Jesus. But God did give Jesus as our deliverance. The cross is not about appeasing God‘s wrath. Jesus himself said that the father judges, no man. The cross is about restoring that which is lost. It is about fixing what is broken inside man. It is Jesus taking every aspect of our brokenness upon himself so that he can redeem it, and restore it, and heal it. The only reason you’re thinking this way is because the Calvinist trained us all to accept PSA as the gospel. But it is their gospel. It is their gospel of an angry God. And all of it ignores the true heart of a father who desires to get his kids back and will pay any price to restore us.

@PracticalTheolo @JandersonDalat Read the text. Not your "eisegetic" version of it. The "word" was God in being. Not God in attributable definition.

@JandersonDalat No one takes 'was God' as a straightforward identity (except perhaps Modalists). The word is what God is - it reflects his character and intentions. Yes, the word dwelt among them *through Jesus*.

The big problem with the Trinitarian/JW identification of Jesus with 'the word' at John 1:1 is what comes before, and what comes after. 1. What comes before is most of the NT. The Fourth Gospel was written last of the gospels, and there was already a central and broadly attested (22/27 books of the NT feature it) concept of 'the word' operating in Christendom as the active and living gospel/message re Christianity. Early Christians would have heard 'the word' in that context. Before that, there was the concept of 'the word' as seen all over the Old Testament, which wasn't a person, and wasn't Jesus, but again a message from God. 2. What comes after is the entire main body of the Fourth Gospel, where 'the word' is used > 30x but is never identified with Jesus, but again and again distinguished from him. Put these two together, and the received interpretation just isn't plausible.

@PracticalTheolo @ThePeoplesPul In vs. 1 the "word was God". This is identity. The "word" is revealed in the verse as distinct yet identical in identity. The "word" is not an "it". God is a sentient being. You can say all you want, but your efforts to redefine what eternal life in God is, is a vain effort.

@ThePeoplesPul The script became a play The score became music The word became flesh p.s. the word is personal, but not a person.

@TodAshby Unless the Lord stops the progression of unrightousness, it always goes from bad to worse. "Allowing" the progression of sin is a severe judgment, while at the same time being patient and continuing to call for repentance. Isaiah 45:22

“Why do the wicked still live, Continue on, also become very powerful?” (Job 21:7)

@Be_Like_JChrist @JosephSwar86703 Christus Victor-ites (i.e. the fishhook theory of atonement) do not believe in a substitutionary atonement. Therefore, they do not seem to understand that Jesus is exalted at the right-hand of the Father & represents those for whom he died and ever lives to make intercession for.

@JosephSwar86703 Just as i stated already.

@PracticalTheolo @QuestionTrinity What variant; what vs are you referring to? Since you claim that "this is almost" UNANIMOUSLY* "considered by translators to be a corruption", please provide the source of your claim. Which translators? * What %age of translators is needed to make "almost unanimously" a reality?

@QuestionTrinity A lot of Trinitarians quote the variant that just says 'Lord', and seem unaware this is almost unanimously considered by translators to be a corruption.

For those that claim Rev 1:8 is about the Son, can you name another verse where he is called “Lord God”? “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

@J17apologetics @KahuM90934 J17 - See below for a link to a doc I made that provides some response your OP... LMK if any issues getting the info... Ciao! bit.ly/4tsKoWs

@KahuM90934 @isaiah489 Answer the argument. Stop whining like a baby

In every instance these four words will always refute Calvinism. Calvinists believe Paul cited the old testament just to make a DIFFERENT point than the original authors he appealed to! If they had read the originals they never would have assumed Paul was asserting Calvinism

@J17apologetics @KahuM90934 Name those "4 things".

@KahuM90934 Oh please. Just because the word "predestined" exists, you think that means everything is predestined??? He predestined like 4 things!

@cbankston7 @WWUTTcom As Creator, what events in the history of mankind did the Eternal God not ordain to happen? Or: What events just spontaneously (and independently) happened without any influence at all, from God.

@WWUTTcom Applying this claim: If a child is sexually assaulted by a calvinist, God commanded it and they could not change it You should never trust anyone with this line of thinking. There's nothing they cannot justify doing - while blaming God's decretive will

So let me get this straight... The Bible explicitly says God predestined the murder of His own perfect Son, and who would do it (Acts 4:27-28), man's greatest evil for God's greatest good (Genesis 50:20), as foreordained by God. The Bible explicitly says nothing comes to pass, good or bad, unless God has commanded it (Lamentations 3:37-38). It explicitly says every single one of your days was written in God's book before a single day came to be (Psalm 139:16), and you cannot change it (Job 14:5), nor can you add even a single moment more to your span of life (Matthew 6:27). But you're still certain that God does not ordain whatsoever comes to pass? Hm.

@AletheiaHS @SoteriologyA1 Please share where "The Bible literally says so".

@SoteriologyA1 A man is not condemned for a sin nature. He is judged guilty for transgressing the law. The Bible literally says so

🚨 Have you ever wondered why Leighton Flowers says God doesn't condemn us for our "sin nature" or our "sins," but only for what we do "with the truth"? There is a hidden reason for this wording, and it changes everything you thought you knew about the Gospel. In Leighton’s system, Jesus "took away the sins of the world" in a way that includes everyone in Hell. You may have heard him use the all inclusive phrase "Every man, women, boy, and girl". This means he believes that for every "man, woman, boy, and girl," the penalty for breaking the 10 Commandments was neutralized from birth. Whether you believe in Jesus or not, your lies, thefts, and hatred are already "paid for" and off the books. The Problem: If sin is gone, why is there a Hell? If the Law is no longer the reason people go to Hell, Leighton has to invent a *new* reason. This is where the 11th Commandment Theology comes in. He shifts the entire judgment away from "Did you break God’s Law?" to "What did you do with God’s "Truth"? Think about how strange this is. It’s like a man who proposes to a woman and says, "I have provided a beautiful life for you."... but... when she says, "I’m not interested," he locks her in a basement and tortures her for no other reason than the fact that her "choice" offended him. In this theology, you aren't punished for being a criminal (breaking the Law); you are punished solely for saying "No" to a "well meant" proposal. The only reason the punishment looks like the penalty for sin is because they know hell is way overkill for just a "wrong choice". It’s not Grace. It’s a new Law where your "Choice" is the only thing that saves you or damns you.

@423chachee @RyanHurst171 @Soteriology101 Also Ps 5:4 - biblegateway.com/verse/en/Psalm… It seems that the Lord is able to take no pleasure {חָפֵץ} in the death of "one who dies" and yet maintains perfect holiness, goodness and justice while doing all He pleases {אֶחְפֹּץ} in the pure exercise of His perfect will. Same Heb. root

@423chachee @RyanHurst171 @Soteriology101 Psalm 115:3; 135:6

Leighton, was God displeased when He destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah? Was He displeased when He flooded the earth killing all but eight people? Was He displeased when He took the firstborn of the Egyptians in passover or when He drowned them in the Red sea?