Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

John Young

"'Oops, I missed a step' Salvation."

Recommended Posts

 

shall

 (shăl)

aux.v.

1. Used before a verb in the infinitive to show:
a. Something that will take place or exist in the future: We shall arrive tomorrow.
b. An order, promise, requirement, or obligation: You shall leave now. He shall answer for his misdeeds. The penalty shall not exceed two years in prison.
c. Something that is inevitable: That day shall come.

[Middle English schal, from Old English sceal; see skel- in Indo-European roots.]
Usage Note: The traditional rules for using shall and will prescribe a highly complicated pattern of use in which the meanings of the forms change according to the person of the subject. In the first person, shall is used to indicate simple futurity: I shall (not will) have to buy another ticket. In the second and third persons, the same sense of futurity is expressed by will: The comet will (not shall) return in 87 years. You will (not shall) probably encounter some heavy seas when you round the point. The use of will in the first person and of shall in the second and third may express determination, promise, obligation, or permission, depending on the context. Thus I will leave tomorrow indicates that the speaker is determined to leave; You and she shall leave tomorrow is likely to be interpreted as a command. The sentence You shall have your money expresses a promise ("I will see that you get your money"), whereas You will have your money makes a simple prediction. Such, at least, are the traditional rules. The English and some traditionalists about usage are probably the only people who follow these rules and then not with perfect consistency. In America, people who try to adhere to them run the risk of sounding pretentious or haughty. Americans normally use will to express most of the senses reserved for shall in English usage. Americans use shall chiefly in first person invitations and questions that request an opinion or agreement, such as Shall we go? and in certain fixed expressions, such as We shall overcome. In formal style, Americans use shall to express an explicit obligation, as in Applicants shall provide a proof of residence, though this sense is also expressed by must or should. In speech the distinction that the English signal by the choice of shall or will may be rendered by stressing the auxiliary, as in I will leave tomorrow ("I intend to leave"); by choosing another auxiliary, such as must or have to; or by using an adverb such as certainly. · In addition to its sense of obligation, shall can also convey high moral seriousness that derives in part from its extensive use in the King James Bible, as in "Righteousness shall go before him and shall set us in the way of his steps" (Ps 85:13) and "He that shall humble himself shall be exalted" (Mt 23:12). The prophetic overtones that shall bears with it have no doubt led to its use in some of the loftiest rhetoric in English. This may be why Lincoln chose to use it instead of will in the Gettysburg Address: "government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." See Usage Note at should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

shall

 (shăl)

aux.v.

1. Used before a verb in the infinitive to show:
a. Something that will take place or exist in the future: We shall arrive tomorrow.
b. An order, promise, requirement, or obligation: You shall leave now. He shall answer for his misdeeds. The penalty shall not exceed two years in prison.
c. Something that is inevitable: That day shall come.

​You do realize that grammar rules in English are as stable as a termite in a yo-yo?

And have changed over and over, century after century. Our 'modern' English language grammar is only from the mid-1700's.

The KJB is not set up 'grammatically', and Noah Webster 'corrected' it and we have the 'Webster Bible' to prove it. But it didn't need correcting.

We just need to understand the text for what it says, and you can't have 2 different ways to get saved. And you do when you tell someone they need to ask Jesus to save them in a prayer. Nobody in the scriptures did that.

Unless the Lord has showed someone something he didn't want the rest of us seeing.

So irregardless of someone's 'grammar' rules, the way to get saved is by hearing the word of God preached and being converted through believing in Jesus Christ with their whole heart, A relationship follows, hence 'calling upon the name of the Lord' is a result of getting saved. The verse in Romans 10:14 being a good proof verse here. They can't call upon him unless they have believed in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​You do realize that grammar rules in English are as stable as a termite in a yo-yo?

And have changed over and over, century after century. Our 'modern' English language grammar is only from the mid-1700's.

The KJB is not set up 'grammatically', and Noah Webster 'corrected' it and we have the 'Webster Bible' to prove it. But it didn't need correcting.

We just need to understand the text for what it says, and you can't have 2 different ways to get saved. And you do when you tell someone they need to ask Jesus to save them in a prayer. Nobody in the scriptures did that.

Unless the Lord has showed someone something he didn't want the rest of us seeing.

So irregardless of someone's 'grammar' rules, the way to get saved is by hearing the word of God preached and being converted through believing in Jesus Christ with their whole heart, A relationship follows, hence 'calling upon the name of the Lord' is a result of getting saved. The verse in Romans 10:14 being a good proof verse here. They can't call upon him unless they have believed in him.

​Noah Webster wrote an American dictionary, I highlighted the difference in common American usage and traditional English usage. This wasn't an American (including Webster's 1828) but English dictionary. Both Geneva and King James use words within an English context of usage and definition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Noah Webster wrote an American dictionary, I highlighted the difference in common American usage and traditional English usage. This wasn't an American (including Webster's 1828) but English dictionary. Both Geneva and King James use words within an English context of usage and definition.

​So, did you read my last post or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are happy then to change the meaning of shall to suit your statements?

​I am happy to follow the whole chapter in Romans and not just take one verse out of that context like the common misguided preacher who wants to pick up his attendance numbers to make himself look more spiritual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I am happy to follow the whole chapter in Romans and not just take one verse out of that context like the common misguided preacher who wants to pick up his attendance numbers to make himself look more spiritual.

 

So there's no chance that such a man could be genuinely mistaken?

He MUST be taking it out of context with the intent to deceive to increase attendance numbers?

I stand in awe of your superior insight and spirituality........

 

Personally I have found that section of Romans messes with a lot of people's theology.

But I tend to accept what is written as it is written - poor humble dumb little bloke that I am.  That is about my limit, and I am afraid it limits me to what what is written.

Just not smart enough to figure out alternate meanings to words.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faith from the heart with the Spirit gives the man salvation but the confession gives the evidence. Its as simple as that.

Their is no need to argue the simantics of will vs shall. Its dangous taritory when trying to base doctrines on the nuances of single words rather then the whole context of scripture.

(Side note: "Irregardlsss" is not a proper word either but we all understood what was ment....) ^_^

Edited by John Young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

(Side note: "Irregardlsss" is not a proper word either but we all understood what was ment....) ^_^

 

From Merriam Webster site an Encyclopedia Britannica Company:
 

irregardless

adverb ir·re·gard·less \ˌir-i-ˈgärd-ləs\

Definition of IRREGARDLESS

nonstandard

Usage Discussion of IRREGARDLESS

Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that there is no such word. There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that is is a word. Just not a proper word. "and it is still a long way from general acceptance." "Regardless" or "irrespective" is the proper word.... However, I digress in pointing it out. It was just too fun to pass up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 5:24

24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

 

Word Origin and History for shall

v.

Old English sceal, Northumbrian scule "I owe/he owes, will have to, ought to, must" (infinitive sculan, past tense sceolde), a common Germanic preterite-present verb (along with can, may, will), from Proto-Germanic *skal- (cf. Old Saxon sculan, Old Frisian skil, Old Norse and Swedish skola, Middle Dutch sullen, Old High German solan, German sollen, Gothic skulan "to owe, be under obligation;" related via past tense form to Old English scyld "guilt," German Schuld "guilt, debt;" also Old Norse Skuld, name of one of the Norns), from PIE root *skel- (2) "to be under an obligation."

Ground sense of the Germanic word probably is "I owe," hence "I ought." The sense shifted in Middle English from a notion of "obligation" to include "futurity." Its past tense form has become should (q.v.). Cognates outside Germanic are Lithuanian skeleti "to be guilty," skilti "to get into debt;" Old Prussian skallisnan "duty," skellants "guilty."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WILL

Word Origin and History for will

v.

Old English *willan, wyllan "to wish, desire, want" (past tense wolde), from Proto-Germanic *welljan (cf. Old Saxon willian, Old Norse vilja, Old Frisian willa, Dutch willen, Old High German wellan, German wollen, Gothic wiljan "to will, wish, desire," Gothic waljan "to choose"). The Germanic words are from PIE *wel-/*wol- "be pleasing" (cf. Sanskrit vrnoti "chooses, prefers," varyah "to be chosen, eligible, excellent," varanam "choosing;" Avestan verenav- "to wish, will, choose;" Greek elpis "hope;" Latin volo, velle "to wish, will, desire;" Old Church Slavonic voljo, voliti "to will," veljo, veleti "to command;" Lithuanian velyti "to wish, favor," pa-vel-mi "I will," viliuos "I hope;" Welsh gwell "better").

Cf. also Old English wel "well," literally "according to one's wish;" wela "well-being, riches." The use as a future auxiliary was already developing in Old English. The implication of intention or volition distinguishes it from shall, which expresses or implies obligation or necessity. Contracted forms, especially after pronouns, began to appear 16c., as in sheele for "she will." The form with an apostrophe is from 17c.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We seem to treat the two words "will" and "shall" as having the same meaning; but isn't so. For instance, it is God's "Will" (desire) that everyone be saved; but of course we know that not everyone is going to be. But in verses like John 5:24 it uses the much stronger word: "shall". According to the word origin reference above. John 5:24 is saying that one who believes "is obligated to be" saved. Why? Because God Himself made the promise and it is contingent upon his word. God does not go back on His Word. He obligates Himself to it. This isn't something that God merely "desires" to come to pass; He's saying that it is going to happen, it's a done deal. Just thought I would point that out.

Edited by heartstrings
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm agreeing with one thing that I think "GenevaPreacher" is saying:

You get saved when you believe, in your heart. As an example, does everyone know of Stephen Hawking?  Stephen Hawking can communicate with a machine. But what if that machine breaks down? What about other mute people with ALS who are trapped inside their own bodies? If someone like that ever believes on Jesus, I promise you his spirit will cry out in a loud enough voice for God to hear and he "shall" be saved and he "shall" not come into condemnation. Furthermore, salvation takes no steps. God already took all the "steps": all we have to do is believe on Jesus.

Edited by heartstrings
to add

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I don't know what you're trying to say. perhaps you could tell me what you think this verse means...

Acts 13:48

48And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed..

 

​I was just showing that it is the Lord who does the calling, which the Lord Jesus called 'draw' in John 6:44.

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

I will get back to you on Acts 13:48, my wife just dipped up ice cream!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


To be clear the drawing of the Spirit is not a mystical thing. The Spirit draws all men by the hearing of His spoken word through the preaching of saved people and their biblical witnessing materials (His word transmitted in print and comprehended as speech in the mind of the reader). If you hear the word and have faith because of them then you are "elected and ordained" by God to be saved. (John 6:63, Romans 10:13-15.)

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Written Word:

Exodus 34:27 And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

Jeremiah 36:2 a. Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words....

Revelation 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Spoken Word:

2 Samuel 23:2 The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue.

Isaiah 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever.

John 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

John 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

Ephesians 1:13 in whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Combined written and spoken Word:

Acts 8:29-31 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. 30 And Philip ran thither tohim, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

Edited by John Young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. back to the original topic, I reiterate that there are no "steps" to take to get saved. Jesus took all the necessary steps and all we are required to do is to believe on him, trusting Him to save us from our sin. Some people cannot physically "call" on Him or "confess" him audibly. But it's the heart God is interested in and one cannot, nor will not "call" upon God in faith until the heart has already truly repented/turned to Jesus.

 

Geneva, I believe that those gentiles in Acts 13 "ordained" themselves. But ,to avoid hijacking this thread, we can save that discussion for another.

Edited by heartstrings
clarification

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I don't know what you're trying to say. perhaps you could tell me what you think this verse means...

Acts 13:48

48And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed..

 

​They didn't 'ordain' themselves like Heartstrings thinks, but they were already known by God to be one's who 'would believe', (because of the preaching of the gospel), ahead of our time, in God's time, (which is eternal time, you know, from the end God sees the beginning and knows what is going to happen even before it does.) Thus they were ordained even before the world was. All because God is all knowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In most every passage of the King James Bible, where the word "ordain" or "ordained" is used, you will find what or who was ordained, what it or they were ordained to, and who did the ordaining. But In Acts 13:48, it only says who was "ordained", and what they were ordained to: eternal life. Therefore, the word denotes a state of being, But how did the state come to be? First we need to define "ordained".

ordain

v.

late 13c., "to appoint or admit to the ministry of the Church," from stem of Old French ordener "place in order, arrange, prepare; consecrate, designate" (Modern French ordonner) and directly from Latin ordinare "put in order, arrange, dispose, appoint," from ordo (genitive ordinis) "order" (see order (n.)). The notion is "to confer holy orders upon." Meaning "to decree, enact" is from c.1300; sense of "to set (something) that will continue in a certain order" is from early 14c. Related: Ordained; ordaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember English Lit in high school? This is an excerpt from Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales, which demonstrates an early use of the word "ordained", and I would ask you: who ordains concupiscence in a man?

This concupiscence, when it is wrongfully disposed or ordained in a man, it maketh him covet, by covetise of flesh, fleshly sin by sight of his eyes, as to earthly things, and also covetise of highness by pride of heart."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Similar Content

    • By Roselove
      I know someone that I suspect is probably not saved. He has caused me some emotional issues, he’s kind of manipulative and erratic I guess, but I won’t get into much of that. 
      He told me of how he tried to kill Himself a few years ago and just a bunch of other strange stuff. 
      I’m very concerned for this guy. From what I’ve seen on his posts years ago on Facebook, he was raised Catholic. So I assume that he might have a skewed idea of Christianity, if in fact he even considers himself one (I don’t know). 
      I would love for someone to talk to him. He lives across the country from me and I know that if someone I know locally, adds him/messages him, he would know that I was the one who got them to speak with him. There’s some reasons that I feel that would cause an issue. 
      Is there anyone that doesn’t live in Texas, that could maybe talk to him? If so, please message me on here and I will give you his Facebook info. Knowing his personality, I’m pretty sure he’d add anyone. 
    • By MrsJ88
      Hi there. I'm brand new to this wonderful page. I would like to ask for God's will to be done in this custody case. My daughter is in that delicate stage, wanting to be saved but still a little bit unclear about what it truly means. Her father is atheist, and filling her with the nonsense that he believes. He is also in the process of trying to break up my marriage and the family we have. He wants to take my daughter and have her full time. This would be detrimental to her. Both mentally, emotionally and spiritually. Please, if you would pray that he see God, and that he realizes how desperately he needs God, and the salvation he offers. Also, please let me know what I can pray for, for you. Thank you! God Bless!
      Melissa.
    • By Roselove
      Came across this, was a little confused. Can you guys explain this to me? Thanks! 
      https://billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/are-you-saved-or-are-you-being-saved”-1-cor-15-2 
      http://www.simplybible.com/f066.htm
    • By Jordan Kurecki
      Thanks to those who prayed for me, and gave to me to go to Uganda last summer. For those who saw my video update, I mentioned a man named Fanuel, I had gotten to go and share the Gospel with him at his hut and he got saved, then proceeded to come to our meetings that same evening and gave a public testimony of salvation:
      Here is a picture of him from the day he got saved in summer of 2016. Then I received another picture from my friend over in Uganda of this second picture, which was him at the Church today, one year later, attending soul winning training! Praise God
       


    • By Roselove
      So, I've been wondering something for quite sometime. 
      Ive noticed that people who have a struggle with doubting their salvation and those who are afraid of having committed the unpardonable sin, tend to have these fears, for a very long time. It seems that it's nearly impossible for them to have enough assurance for them to stop fearing and obsessing over it. 
      Ive been going through this for over 5 years and have read many others talking about this, too. It tends to take years for people to get over these fears, that is, if they ever do. 
      Why is this particular problem, so extremely hard to get under control? I have clinical OCD, so I'm sure it contributes, the others might have this problem, too, but why won't God take away these terrible fears and obsessions, over whether or not we are saved or have committed the unpardonable sin? 
      I know that He wants us to know whether we are saved or lost or if we are forgiveable. I know that someone cannot effectively do His will, without this i would think, so why is this particular problem so hard to overcome, even with fervent prayer? I understand that God works in His timing and that we have to suffer at times in this life, sometimes for many years, but I wouldn't think that this kind of thing, would be one of the things that would be helpful to go through? I'm not sure? 
      What do you all think, about this? 
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 27 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...