Reverend?

[Salyan]

First off, as mentioned by others in this thread, Christ died for us.  In the past.  He loved the world. (John 3:16).  Loved is in past tense, referring to something that happened or was the case in the past. 

​For all your many explanations, there is one glaring thing wrong with your eisegesis. John 3:16 isn't in past tense because God loved the world in the past (and supposedly no longer does so), it is in past tense because God gave His Son (as a baby, on the cross, whichever) in the past. There is no need for long, convoluted explanations to make the Bible say something it doesn't.  

And I stand by those words 100%.  Of course they don't say or imply what you claim.  I urge you to stop lying for Satan, repent, and accept the true Jesus of the Christian Bible.

You know, when I was a young adult, my youth group spent a good deal of time discussing Calvinism. Not that we knew that that was what it was called. There was a strong Reformed element in our community, and their teachings filtered through the schools and into our youth. We called it predestinationism (from the verse that started the whole discussion). You know what I discovered? That the god of Calvinism - the god you describe - who creates people just to send them to hell without giving them any option to escape is a sadist, and not worth worshipping. I will stick with the God my Bible describes, clearly and plainly, Who created all, and loves them, and wishes to be loved & obeyed by them as free individuals - not as automatons. Does the Bible say God hates the workers of iniquity? Yes. Are we all workers of iniquity? Yes. Does the Bible say God loves us and sent His son to give us (all) salvation? Yes. Can I, in my human mind, completely reconcile the two statements? Not really. I can partially reconcile it through phrases like 'God hates the sin but loves the sinner'. But here's the thing - God is a wee bit bigger than my puny mind. And I do not have to completely understand something for it to be true.

RevBob, we do not support Calvinist heresy on this site, and I think we've heard enough of your claims for a while. You will cease stating that the beliefs on this board are of Satan (!), and you will desist from promoting your beliefs in this area any further.

[Miss Daisy]

[TheSword]

I see so many things that are Scripturally wrong with that statement!  First off, as mentioned by others in this thread, Christ died for us.  In the past.  He loved the world. (John 3:16).  Loved is in past tense, referring to something that happened or was the case in the past.  Now let's take a look at John 3:17-18: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."  Notice that it says that though Him the world might be Saved.  Not "will be Saved," not "going to be Saved," not even "may be Saved".  In other words, there is only a some odd chance that one actually will be Saved.  That's not me making things up, or claiming something I want.  In fact, I don't want most anyone to go to Hell.  That's just plain and careful reading of the Christian Bible and accepting what it says.  Then the Bible goes on to tell us that those that don't believe (present tense) are condemned already.  Anyway you look at it, this is not an expression of unconditional love that "love preachers" often claim by taking John 3:16 out of context.

Regarding your marriage analogy, that is rather unscriptural.  When we are Born Again, we are converted.  We are not same persons that we were before we were Saved.  So to use your analogy, it would be more like, "if you really wished to change, and become an entirely different person, full of Grace and goodness and charity, then I would love you."  Of course, the Salvation equation is not that simple, and neither are the issues of Jesus' love for His Elect and the despise He has for the reprobate children of the devil. (John 8:44-45)

​That's not an example of plain and careful reading. That's an example of eisegetical reading (i.e. reading your assumptions into it) while ignoring the rest of Scripture. You're quibbling over past and present tense when it makes no contextual sense to do so. As mentioned above, if we take your method of reading with Romans 5:8, then God still hates you and you're going to hell. You see, it says that Christ died, which is past tense. It also says that He died while we were sinners so unless you were born and living in Rome in the first century then Paul wasn't talking to you. You weren't born yet so you couldn't have sinned yet. That's all past tense, so I'm sorry to tell you, you're not one of the elect.

Furthermore, Romans 10:13 and Acts 2:21 make clear that anyone can call on Jesus and they will be saved with certainty. Unfortunately for your point of view, 1 John 2:2 says that Jesus was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. That's an all-inclusive term, so you either have to admit that limited atonement is false, or you have to say that since it was past tense He isn't the propitiation for sins now, just back then, which means once again...you're not one of the elect because that was past tense and you're in the present almost 2000 years later.

Your reading is not plain and careful. It's sloppy and based on your own preconceived notions.

[RevBob]

​For all your many explanations, there is one glaring thing wrong with your eisegesis. John 3:16 isn't in past tense because God loved the world in the past (and supposedly no longer does so), it is in past tense because God gave His Son (as a baby, on the cross, whichever) in the past. There is no need for long, convoluted explanations to make the Bible say something it doesn't. 

​If that was the case, then the Bible woulld've said something like "For God so loves the world that He gave His only begotten Son so that anyone could be Saved".  But that's not what the Bible says, is it?  And this has nothing to do with Calvinism, nor do I worship Calvin as some of your members said.  The latter is a blatant lie, btw.  So do you allow lies?  Do you consider liars to be Saved?

Regarding Jesus hating the reprobates, here's a short essay by one of the most illustrious preachers of this day and age, Dr. Tony Demarcus.  Dr. Tony's ministries are focused on those entangled in carnal sins, such as professional harlots in Nevada, lesbidians, nudists, and Catholics.  He has led hundreds of these former sinners to Salvation!

 

It is only so often that we hear heathens proclaim spiritual rubbish along the lines of "Jesus hates nobody".  My typical response to educate these pagans and cultural pseudo-Christians is "What the hell do you mean that Jesus doesn't hate?"

As always we must look to the Bible (KJV 1611 ONLY) relative to absolutely any belief we may hold.  The Bible tells that Jesus approved of His Father's command that children who cursed their parents should be stoned to death (Matthew 15:3-4). Does this sound like forgivness and love to you? It is blatent intolerance for anyone that does not follow the Word! Jesus told his disciples to bring before Him any non-believer and to slaughter that non-believer to death right before Jesus' eyes (Luke 19:27). Yes this is a parable, but it refers to His second coming. But the main facts are that JESUS spoke this parable, therefore the KILLING reference is attributed to Him! Does one KILL because they love someone or because they HATE them?  Heathens are such ignorant dolts!

More so, Jesus had one man eaten alive by a swarm of worms because the man failed to give Jesus His due (Acts 12:23). Jesus struck a Jew blind for thwarting His teachings.  He struck a man dumb for not paying close enough attention (Luke 1:20). He SCARED a husband and wife to DEATH for not giving Him all the money they made on a real estate transaction!!!! (Acts 5:1-10). Does this sound like love and forgiveness to you? Jesus had to hate these people to be able to do these abhorred acts. This is the Jesus that we know, love, and worship.

Jesus told us we are to live in constant fear of God for He can torture us forever in Hell (Luke 12:5). This is why we must take a rather abusive manner regarding the heathen that does not follow ALL of the doctrines and precepts within the Bible. We don't have time to sugar-coat Gods word, H-E-L-L-O!

If one opts for Christianity, it is beyond me to think that anyone is able to extrapolate from the Bible that of which they accept, the lovey dovey Jesus loves me parts, and not be held responsible for the obligation of the whole where our Savior is KILLING AND TORTURING His creation! I for one cannot usurp what God has written regarding how His Son reacted in certain instances, therefore setting an example, can you?

Now this is how you preach to smartmouthed teenagers!  This is how you preach to the Mor(m)on youngsters!  This is how you get them to respect and fear the Lord, and, as the old hymn goes, to "trust and obey"!

[No Nicolaitans]

Nice Bob...including a quote with foul language from a man that I can't verify exists.

A quote that takes God's word so far out of context, it's not even worth trying to correct...the rubbish speaks for itself.

I still think you're a troll...

[RevBob]

Nice Bob...including a quote with foul language from a man that I can't verify exists.

A quote that takes God's word so far out of context, it's not even worth trying to correct...the rubbish speaks for itself.

​Foul language?  Where?  And I see nothing out of context there.   The Bible clearly says what it says.  We are to Believe it and follow it.

I still think you're a troll...

Well, I really care about what Jesus thinks, and not what some man on the internet may think of me or my dedication to the cause of Christ.

[DaveW]

Well we can clearly see the faulty use of God's Word in that rubbish.

So many errors of fact - not even "different inerpretation" - just plain misunderstanding - or is it deliberate misrepresentation?

Just to show one:

Why did "the husband and wife" die?

The Bible actually explains that this (false) preacher is wrong. He simply can't read......

 

[No Nicolaitans]

 

​Foul language?  Where? 

​

Where? Here...

 

 

 It is only so often that we hear heathens proclaim spiritual rubbish along the lines of "Jesus hates nobody".  My typical response to educate these pagans and cultural pseudo-Christians is

"What the hell do you mean that Jesus doesn't hate?"

​

The use of the word "hell" in such a way is foul language.

​

​

[No Nicolaitans]

 

I still think you're a troll...

 

 

 

​

​

[Salyan]

"God so loves the world that He gave..."? Sorry, but the English language does not allow for such a mangling of verb tenses. Your proposed revision is not a possibility. 

I feel like I remember a Reverend Cooper back a while... Any chance you're related to him?

[Ukulelemike]

I see so many things that are Scripturally wrong with that statement!  First off, as mentioned by others in this thread, Christ died for us.  In the past.  He loved the world. (John 3:16).  Loved is in past tense, referring to something that happened or was the case in the past.  Now let's take a look at John 3:17-18: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."  Notice that it says that though Him the world might be Saved.  Not "will be Saved," not "going to be Saved," not even "may be Saved".  In other words, there is only a some odd chance that one actually will be Saved.  That's not me making things up, or claiming something I want.  In fact, I don't want most anyone to go to Hell.  That's just plain and careful reading of the Christian Bible and accepting what it says.  Then the Bible goes on to tell us that those that don't believe (present tense) are condemned already.  Anyway you look at it, this is not an expression of unconditional love that "love preachers" often claim by taking John 3:16 out of context.

Regarding your marriage analogy, that is rather unscriptural.  When we are Born Again, we are converted.  We are not same persons that we were before we were Saved.  So to use your analogy, it would be more like, "if you really wished to change, and become an entirely different person, full of Grace and goodness and charity, then I would love you."  Of course, the Salvation equation is not that simple, and neither are the issues of Jesus' love for His Elect and the despise He has for the reprobate children of the devil. (John 8:44-45)

​The very fact that God exists outside of linear time, to which we are subject, negates your entire argument. You base your theory upon time, past and present-yet God exists outside of that timeline, He is not subject to it. However, the language is given in a way that will apply to our linear sensibilities. Consider:

"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified." (Rom 8:29, 30)

What we see here, is that God, from the beginning, foreknew those who would be His, and thus, predestined us to be conformed to His Son. Notice, not predestined to be saved, but to conformed to Jesus Christ. This all happened at the beginning, He knew each of us, knew what we would do, the decisions we would make. Thus, he then predestined us to be as Christ, and He called us and He justified us, or, if you will, declared us righteous, and then TAKE NOTE OF THIS, PLEASE, 'them he also glorified'. Notice, that is in the PAST tense. Now, most of us here would agree that we are not yet glorified, BUT, Paul here says that God has already glorified us. Already done. How is that? Well, because according to God, who is, was and shall be, all at the same time, the great I AM, we are already glorified. We are already seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, according to Eph 2:6.

So to make your argument based on past/present/future concerning what God has or shall do, is a straw argument, because according to scripture we are already glorified and seated with Christ.  The God so LOVED the word, doesn't change the fact that He still LOVES the word, and will love the world. He loved it from the time He created it and will love it always, and the offering of His Son Jesus Christ, whose sacrifice covers all those who believe in all times, is not just past, but always. All my sins, past present and future, (to me) have already been forgiven in Christ, and in the mind of God, have been always. He knew me as His child before I was a gleam in my daddy's eye, before anyone was a gleam in anyone's eye.    

[RevBob]

​The very fact that God exists outside of linear time, to which we are subject, negates your entire argument. You base your theory upon time, past and present-yet God exists outside of that timeline, He is not subject to it. However, the language is given in a way that will apply to our linear sensibilities. Consider:

"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified." (Rom 8:29, 30)

What we see here, is that God, from the beginning, foreknew those who would be His, and thus, predestined us to be conformed to His Son. Notice, not predestined to be saved, but to conformed to Jesus Christ. This all happened at the beginning, He knew each of us, knew what we would do, the decisions we would make. Thus, he then predestined us to be as Christ, and He called us and He justified us, or, if you will, declared us righteous, and then TAKE NOTE OF THIS, PLEASE, 'them he also glorified'. Notice, that is in the PAST tense. Now, most of us here would agree that we are not yet glorified, BUT, Paul here says that God has already glorified us. Already done. How is that? Well, because according to God, who is, was and shall be, all at the same time, the great I AM, we are already glorified. We are already seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, according to Eph 2:6.

So to make your argument based on past/present/future concerning what God has or shall do, is a straw argument, because according to scripture we are already glorified and seated with Christ.  The God so LOVED the word, doesn't change the fact that He still LOVES the word, and will love the world. He loved it from the time He created it and will love it always, and the offering of His Son Jesus Christ, whose sacrifice covers all those who believe in all times, is not just past, but always. All my sins, past present and future, (to me) have already been forgiven in Christ, and in the mind of God, have been always. He knew me as His child before I was a gleam in my daddy's eye, before anyone was a gleam in anyone's eye.    

​The argument is not based on whether God is temporal or not, but on the plain reading of the Christian Bible.  Jesus wrote the Bible for us, not for Himself.  The timeframe references are for the readers, to tell us the way things were, the way they are, and the way they will be.

[Alan]

Ukelelemike,

Thank you very much for your excellent biblical definition of predestination according to Romans 8:29 & 30 and Ephesians 2:6. And, that all of the blessings, or fruits, of salvation is due to the foreknowledge of God as brought out in Romans 8:29. I also appreciate your bold stand that are are predestinated, "... to be conformed to the image of his son," and not salvation as the Calvinist decrees.  

Our Calvinist friends forget (either through ignorance, or, deliberate forethought), or just ignore, the foreknowledge of God and the reason for predestination.

[TheSword]

​That's not an example of plain and careful reading. That's an example of eisegetical reading (i.e. reading your assumptions into it) while ignoring the rest of Scripture. You're quibbling over past and present tense when it makes no contextual sense to do so. As mentioned above, if we take your method of reading with Romans 5:8, then God still hates you and you're going to hell. You see, it says that Christ died, which is past tense. It also says that He died while we were sinners so unless you were born and living in Rome in the first century then Paul wasn't talking to you. You weren't born yet so you couldn't have sinned yet. That's all past tense, so I'm sorry to tell you, you're not one of the elect.

Furthermore, Romans 10:13 and Acts 2:21 make clear that anyone can call on Jesus and they will be saved with certainty. Unfortunately for your point of view, 1 John 2:2 says that Jesus was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. That's an all-inclusive term, so you either have to admit that limited atonement is false, or you have to say that since it was past tense He isn't the propitiation for sins now, just back then, which means once again...you're not one of the elect because that was past tense and you're in the present almost 2000 years later.

Your reading is not plain and careful. It's sloppy and based on your own preconceived notions.

​

​The argument is not based on whether God is temporal or not, but on the plain reading of the Christian Bible.  Jesus wrote the Bible for us, not for Himself.  The timeframe references are for the readers, to tell us the way things were, the way they are, and the way they will be.

​Perhaps in all of the conversations you missed the post above, so I've quoted it here to give you a chance to respond if you so choose since you clearly still think what you're doing is a "plain reading."

[Ukulelemike]

​The argument is not based on whether God is temporal or not, but on the plain reading of the Christian Bible.  Jesus wrote the Bible for us, not for Himself.  The timeframe references are for the readers, to tell us the way things were, the way they are, and the way they will be.

​And yet, it is written clearly in a manner that seems to defy a linear mindset in some cases for a reason: to remind us of God's view on things. We see from a past/present/future, yet God tells us that we are already seated in heavenly places, and we are already glorified. Thus, when we consider such things as "For God so LOVED the world..." since God is outside of time, it is impossible for Him to limit His love for the world in a specific time period, unless He was to lay it out clearly for us. We have no qualification to say, "Well, God loved from this time to this time, but He no longer loves the world" That's ridiculous, else we should also declare that Jesus' sacrifice which is past, was only given for those of the past, not for us. When did His grace end? We would say, it hasn't ended, not until the end. So then, who can we declare God's love ended? God's love is part and parcel with Jesus' salvation and grace-they are inextricably entwined.

Rom 5:8 says "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." See, God COMMENDETH. That is an active term. God is still commending His love toward us, toward all, and the proof is that Christ died for us. Now, before you say, 'Yes, died for the elect', John 3:16 reminds us that according to God's love Jesus was sent for 'whosoever believeth'. Indeed, these ARE the elect, but also for everyone-the elect are those who the Lord, by His foreknowledge, knew would receive, and thus, elected them to be conformed to His Son. So, that commendation is for ALL. Jesus died for the sin of the WORLD, hence, all, for ALL the lost, including those who would ultimately not choose salvation. "And I, if I be lifted up, shall draw all men..."

So, God STILL loves all, and Jesus' grace is still offered to all who will hear, as well as to all who won't, hence they are without excuse.