Pastor Scott Markle

James 3:13-18 -- "Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? Let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace."

James 3:13-18 -- "Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? Let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom. But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace."

No, I am thinking that it was not.

Actually, that is NOT what Brother Jim said; that is only what you accused him of saying. What Brother Jim actually said was, "What you have rightly shown is that instead of the elect being shown as such before their Salvation, they are indeed the elect because of Salvation." This statement only indicates that the elect become the elect by means of God's divine work of salvation. It says nothing whatsoever about sinners electing themselves.

Mr. Iconoclast, Thank you for that testimony of God the Father's drawing in your heart, of God the Holy Spirit's conviction upon your heart, and of God the Son's saving work in your life.

No, sin did NOT take God "by surprise;" for the Lord our God is all knowing, possessing perfect before-knowledge of all things from eternity past before anything ever occurred. However, the perfect before-knowledge of the Lord our God is not equivalent to the sovereign decree of the Lord our God. If by "control over sin" you mean, does the Lord our God possess such sovereign control that He determines all circumstances so as to limit the number of choices that are possible to us in any given case, then my answer would be -- Yes. If by "control over sin" you mean, does the Lord our God possess such sovereign control that He determines all consequences of the sinful choices that we might make, then again my answer would be -- Yes. However, if by "control over sin" you mean, does the Lord our God possess such sovereign control that He determines that actual choices to sin that we make, then my answer would be an emphatic -- NO!!! Yes, He controls/determines the circumstances around our sinful choices. Yes, He controls/determines the consequences of our sinful choices. No, He does not control/determine our sinful choices themselves. Because, as I stated in answer to question #1, the Lord our God possessed perfect before-knowledge of humanity's sin before the foundation of the world. Even so, because of His loving and gracious nature, the Lord our God also before the foundation of the world established a plan of salvation for sinners. No, as per my answer for question #1. I really could not answer this question until I know how you are defining the word "ordained" within the context of your question. Do you mean by the word "ordained" within the context of your question that the Lord our God predetermined (not simply before-knew) every single event and decision that takes place, including every single decision and action of sin? The Lord our God is NOT a victim of sin and rebellion. Rather, His response/reaction to the existence of humanity's sin was to predetermine a plan for victory over sin and rebellion. (Note: Implying that the reality of response/reaction requires the responder to be a victim is inaccurate; for a responder can in fact be a victor.) The Lord our God is always, through His all-wise plan and almighty power, the Victor. As such, He is certainly able to govern the wickedness of sinful angels and sinful mankind so as to bring glory unto Himself. Indeed, He will bring glory unto Himself in relation to the wickedness of sinful angels by ultimately obtaining victory over them when He casts them into the lake of fire for eternity. Indeed, He will bring glory unto Himself in relation to human believers in Christ by ultimately obtaining victory over their sinfulness when He establishes them in perfect Christ-likeness for eternity. Indeed, He will bring glory unto Himself in relation to human unbelievers by ultimately obtaining victory over them when He casts them into the like of fire for eternity. Yet although the Lord our God can and does govern the wickedness of sinful angels and sinful mankind so as to bring glory unto Himself, He most certainly does NOT determine their individual choices to sin against Him. Those sinful choices are determined by them within the boundaries of the freedom of choice that He has granted to them as morally responsible beings. The Lord God whom I worship is NOT the one who has preordained or caused sin. Rather, He is the One who has established a way of victory over sin.

Above is a quote from the 1689 (Calvinistic) Baptist Confession of Faith to which Mr. Iconoclast referred. It may be noticed that there is a self-contradiction within this point of that confession. The point above begins with the statement, "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity." Therefore, this is talking about that which "God hath decreed in himself" before He had created any part of the creation, that is -- before any existence of angelic beings (including Lucifer), before any existence of human beings, before any existence of sin or death, before any existence of temptation to sin, etc. So then, the point above continues, "God that decreed in himself, from all eternity [that is -- before the existence of any part, good or bad, of the creation], by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ALL THINGS, whatsoever comes to pass." Now, according to God's own Word Lucifer's proud rebellion against God (the very first act of sin within the creation) certainly did come to pass. Thus according to the above Calvinistic confession, Lucifer's first act of proud rebellion against God was -- 1. Decreed by God in Himself. 2. Decreed by God from all eternity (before Lucifer ever existed). 3. Decreed by the most wise counsel of God's own will. 4. Decreed by the most HOLY counsel of God's own will. 5. Decreed freely by God's own will. 6. Decreed UNCHANGEABLY by God's own will. Basic logic would easily lead us then to conclude that the God of this confession is indeed the very author of sin, the very One who decreed in Himself freely by the counsel of His own will for the very first act of sinful rebellion to occur. Yet this point in the above confession attempts to relieve this concern by adding, "Yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein." Wait?? So, we are being told by this confession that God personally, eternally, wisely, holily, willfully, freely, and unchangeably DECREED sin, but that He most definitely is not the author of that sin. I have to ask -- What exactly does "author" mean then? Indeed, this point in the above confession continues further, "Nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established." Well now I am confused by the apparent contradictions? Is there free will, or is there divine decree? Can free will compete with divine desire, or does divine decree overrule all freedom of choice? Finally, this point in the above confession concludes, "In which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree." So now, we are informed by this confession that God Himself disposes all things, which in the context of the point would seem to mean "all things, whatsoever comes to pass," and further that God Himself by His own power and faithfulness accomplishes His decree, which encompasses "all things, whatsoever comes to pass." Thus according to the above Calvinistic confession, Lucifer's first act of proud rebellion against God, which definitely did come to pass, and thus was indeed decreed by God, was -- 1. Decreed by God in Himself. 2. Decreed by God from all eternity (before Lucifer ever existed). 3. Decreed by the most wise counsel of God's own will. 4. Decreed by the most HOLY counsel of God's own will. 5. Decreed freely by God's own will. 6. Decreed UNCHANGEABLY by God's own will. 7. Disposed by God Himself. 8. Accomplished by God's own power. 9. Accomplished by God's own faithfulness. As for myself, I emphatically respond -- GOD FORBID!!! This is NOT the One true and living God that is revealed by His Holy Word!!!

Mr. Iconoclast, According to your understanding in the Calvinistic system of belief, does the Calvinistic system of belief hold concerning the absolute sovereignty of the Lord our God that He "totally controls" every single event that occurs? Furthermore, according to your understanding in the Calvinistic system of belief, does the Calvinistic system of belief hold concerning the absolute sovereignty of the Lord our God that He "totally controls" every single decision of every human being and every angelic being?

Well hey, I caught one of those rare Brother DaveW appearances. Good to see that you are still around these parts. Still counting you as a forum friend. ?

I possess some of those, and just as many books by Calvinists. However, I am not at all bound by the human authors that I read, but by my diligent study and searching of God's Holy Word itself. Indeed, throughout these thread discussions it should have become evident that I do not simply regurgitate the writings of men, but that I engage the Scriptures with thorough personal study. You are correct that right now I am "set to resist" that which I believe to be false teaching, and that I would not be "looking for help" from those whom I consider to be false teachers. Indeed, I firmly oppose any who appear to "wrest the Scriptures" when they teach that which is not in conformity to the precise grammar of any given passage of Scripture.

No need to guess. I am indeed a dispensationalist. I do indeed reject the "covenant theology" of the Calvinistic system of belief.

Which is the same as I presented in my posting above. Indeed, who are these "all" that are drawn/taught of God? This is simply not true. Isaiah 54:13 in its context is not talking about God's children. Rather, it is talking about all the children of the Israelites. Indeed, let us notice carefully how our Lord quoted Isaiah 54:13, and how He altered the quote by leaving out the phrase "thy children." Indeed, by doing so our Lord indicated that for the context of John 6:45 the emphasis of understanding should not be upon any idea of children at all (for that is the very portion that He dropped), but that for the context of John 6:45 the emphasis of understanding should be upon the idea of "all" (for that is the word that He specifically retained). Thus the attempt to lessen the meaning of "all" in John 12:32 by means of John 6:45 is simply inaccurate. Yet in the Greek the verbs "hath heard" and "hath learned" are active voice participles, indicating that these individuals actively chose to hear and learn. Even so, the verse is NOT conveying the idea that these individuals were somehow passively made to hear and to learn. These among the "all" whom God the Father taught willingly responded with hearing and learning, whereas others among the "all" whom God the Father taught willfully responded with hardening and rejection. Their response to God the Father's work of teaching/drawing determined their direction.

My statement said nothing whatsoever about any other portion of Isaiah than that of Isaiah 54. Even so, my statement stands as given. Isaiah 54 itself is about the restoration of Israel by the hand of the Lord their Redeemer. The only reference to the Gentiles in the entire chapter of Isaiah 54 itself is in verse 3; and that verse does not say that the Gentiles will be included with Israel, but that they will be inherited by Israel. Now, if you desire to demonstrate that I am wrong in this, quote something from Isaiah 54 itself that demonstrates otherwise.

No, Isaiah 54 is about the restoration of Israel by the hand of the Lord their Redeemer. The only reference to the Gentiles in the entire chapter is in verse 3; and that verse does not say that the Gentiles will be included with Israel, but that they will be inherited by Israel. Nevertheless, the ONLY portion of Isaiah 54 that our Lord Jesus Christ quoted in John 6:45 is the first half of verse 13 -- "And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord." In the context of Isaiah 54, this clearly refers to all the children of the Israelites. However, in John 6:45 our Lord Jesus Christ divinely changed the quote by dropping the specific reference to the Israelites' children -- "And they shall be all taught of God." Now, in my explanation of John 6:35-47, I did not make up any story at all about Isaiah 54. I simply pointed out that our Lord Jesus Christ quoted from Isaiah 54:13, but that He divinely altered that quote for the context of John 6:35-47 itself.

Indeed, He did say that in John 6:37. Indeed, I did acknowledge this truth in my explanation of the passage and in my concluding sequence from the passage: John 6:45 -- "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." Our Lord Jesus Christ clearly taught in this verse that "all" shall be taught of God. He also clearly taught in this verse that it is an individual who first hears and learns of the Father from His work of teaching that comes unto/believes on Him for salvation. Such is not a fabrication. Rather, it is what our Lord Himself clearly taught. Denying this is denying what our Lord Jesus Christ clearly taught in this verse.

Ah yes, John 6:37-44 according to the Calvinistic system of belief. False (by adding to Scripture what is not there). In John 6:37 our Lord Jesus Christ stated, "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." In this verse Jesus said nothing at all about the time "before the world was." In fact, in His statement Jesus employed the present tense verbs "giveth" and "cometh," not past tense verbs. False (by changing what Scripture actually says). The opening portion of Psalm 110:3 reads, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power." It does NOT say that they are "made" willing, nor does it say anything about them being "unwilling." False. I have no need to leave the context of John 6:35-47 in order to combat the Calvinistic viewpoint thereof. So, what do we learn from what it actually teaches? John 6:35 -- "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst." From this verse we are able to discern that in this context "coming to Christ" is equivalent to "believing on Christ." John 6:37 -- "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." From this verse we learn that God the Father gives a certain group of individuals to God the Son. Furthermore, we learn that "all" (every single individual) of the group that God the Father gives to God the Son actually and certainly do come to/believe on God the Son. Finally, we learn that God the Son will "in no wise cast out," but will certain receive," anyone who comes to/believes on Him. Even so, if we were to put these truths in a logical sequence, we would have the following: 1. God the Father gives some unto God the Son. 2. ALL that God the Father gives actually and certainly come to/believe on God the Son. 3. God the Son does not reject, but definitely receives any who come to/believe on Him. John 6:38-39 -- "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." Herein we learn that God the Son does not reject, but definitely receives any who come to/believe on Him so as to be in direct obedience to God the Father's will. Furthermore, we learn that God the Son has been assigned by God the Father not to lose even a single one of those whom God the Father gives to him. Finally, we learn that in obedience to God the Father's will God the Son will certainly raise up again at the last day (in the resurrection) every single one whom God the Father gives Him. Even so, if we were to add these truths to our logical sequence, we would now have the following: 1. God the Father gives some unto God the Son. 2. ALL that God the Father gives actually and certainly come to/believe on God the Son. 3. God the Son does not reject, but definitely receives any who come to/believe on Him. 4. God the Son will not lose, but will keep every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. 5. God the Son will certainly raise up again in the resurrection every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. John 6:40 -- "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." Herein we learn that every single one who believes on/comes to God the Son receives everlasting life. Furthermore, we have the truth repeated that God the Son will certainly raise every single one of them up at the last day (in the resurrection). Even so, in our logical sequence, we now have the following: 1. God the Father gives some unto God the Son. 2. ALL that God the Father gives actually and certainly come to/believe on God the Son. 3. God the Son does not reject, but definitely receives any who come to/believe on Him. 4. Every single one who believes on/comes to God the Son receives everlasting life. 5. God the Son will not lose, but will keep every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. 6. God the Son will certainly raise up again in the resurrection every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. At this point our logical sequence looks very promising for the Calvinistic system of belief; for at this point the sequence begins with God the Father's giving some unto God the Son. This certainly appears to indicate that divine election begins the process and is the very means by which individuals come to/believe on God the Son. However, in John 6:43-47 our Lord Jesus Christ revealed more about the process and about God the Father's work in the process. John 6:43-44 -- "Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. 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." Herein we learn that no human sinner has any ability whatsoever in themselves to come unto/believe on God the Son. On the other hand, we learn that the ability for a lost human sinner to come unto/believe on God the Son is specifically granted by God the Father's gracious work of drawing. Finally, we have the truth repeated that God the Son will certainly raise up at the last day (in the resurrection) every single one who comes to/believes on Him. Yet these truths leave us with some questions. What does it mean for God the Father to perform His gracious work of drawing upon a lost sinner's heart? Furthermore, upon whom all does God the Father perform this gracious work of drawing? In order to relieve these question, our Lord Jesus Christ provided an explanation in John 6:45. John 6:45 -- "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." Herein our Lord Jesus Christ initiated his explanation with a quote from Isaiah 54:13, that as God the Son He altered for the present context of John 6:35-47. Therefore, we learn that "all" experience God the Father's work of teaching. Furthermore, we learn that each individual is responsible to hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching. Finally, we learn that each individual who does actually hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching will certainly come to/believe on God the Son. Even so, if we consider just the logical sequence of this verse, we have the following: 1. God the Father performs His work of teaching "all." 2. Each individual is responsible to hear and to learn of God the Father from His work of teaching. 3. Those who actually hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching certainly come to/believe on God the Son. Now, since contextually John 6:45 is presented as an explanation for the truth of John 6:44, we must ask how the explanation of John 6:45 relates to the truth of God the Father's gracious work of drawing. Since in John 6:44 the activity of God the Father is His work of drawing, and since in John 6:45 the activity of God the Father is His work of teaching, we may conclude that in these two verses these two elements are to viewed as contextually equivalent. Even so, in our logical sequence of these two verses together, we would have the following: 1. God the Father performs His work of teaching/drawing "all." 2. Each individual is responsible to hear and to learn of God the Father from His work of teaching. 3. Those who actually hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching certainly come to/believe on God the Son. 4. God the Son will certainly raise up again in the resurrection every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. So then, how does the sequence of these two verses fit with the earlier sequence of John 6:35-40? Since point #3 of this sequence concerns those who come to/believe on God the Son, and since point #2 of the earlier sequence concerns those who come to/believe on God the Son, we may recognize the merge of these two sequences at this point. Furthermore, since John 6:37 defines all those who come to/believe on God the Son as all whom God the Father gives Him, and since John 6:45 defines all those who come to/believe on God the Son as everyone who actually hears and learns of God the Father from His work of teaching/drawing, we may recognize that all those whom God the Father gives to God the Son are all those who hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching/drawing. Even so, we now have the following sequence: 1. God the Father performs His work of teaching/drawing "all." 2. Each individual is responsible to hear and to learn of God the Father from His work of teaching. 3. All of those who hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching/drawing are the some whom God the Father gives to God the Son. 4. ALL that God the Father gives actually and certainly come to/believe on God the Son. 5. God the Son does not reject, but definitely receives any who come to/believe on Him. 6. Every single one who believes on/comes to God the Son receives everlasting life. 7. God the Son will not lose, but will keep every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. 8. God the Son will certainly raise up again in the resurrection every single one whom God the Father gives Him, and thus who come to/believe on Him. John 6:46-47 -- "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." Herein we learn that although lost sinners must hear and learn of God the Father from His work of teaching/drawing, they do not actually see God the Father in any physical manner. This reveals that the teaching/drawing work of God the Father is not a physical work upon the physical ear, but is a spiritual work upon the human heart. Furthermore, we have the truth repeated that every single one who believes on/comes to God the Son receives everlasting life. Now that we have considered all that our Lord Jesus Christ taught throughout the context of John 6:35-47, we recognize that the entire sequence does not begin with God the Father's giving some unto God the Son through a work of divine election. Rather, we recognize that the entire sequence begins with God the Father's work of divine teaching/drawing, which He performs for the sake of "all." Furthermore, we learn that individuals must respond aright to God the Father's work of teaching/drawing, by hearing and learning of Him, in order to be those whom God the Father gives unto God the Son. (Not the Calvinistic system of belief after all.)

Since such terms are not specifically terms of God's own Word, but are created by men, their doctrinal value is only good to the extent that they describe and define the actual teaching of God's Word. In the case of the two examples that you provided ("trinity" and "Bible"), I am happy to accept and use those terms as long as they are being defined Biblically. So, let us consider your man-made doctrinal term, and how you chose to define it (at least thus far): By using the phrase "godly line" in conjunction with the phrase "to trace," you appear to be using "godly line" to convey a progressive lineage of godly individuals (who are godly through their "union with Christ.") Here is my problem with this idea -- God's Word does not present such a progressive lineage of godly individuals. God's Word only presents a singular Family of God, wherein God the Father is the Father of that singular family, wherein God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the First (and eternal) Son of the Father, and wherein all believers through faith in Christ are spiritually born again as joint-heired children with God the Son of God the Father. There is NO "line" of godly lineage thereafter. There is just the one Family -- God the Father, God the Son, and the multitude of God's spiritually born-again children. Now, you quote Romans 9:7 as the evidence for your point. However, Romans 9:7 in its context is NOT teaching anything about a "godly LINE." Consider the full context of Romans 9:6-8 -- "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are NOT the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." The context of Romans 9:6-8 is teaching concerning the family of God, that individuals are NOT the children of God simply by being a part of Abraham's physical seed/lineage. Rather, they are children of God through the divine promise. Indeed, this all is presented in order to verify that NOT all of physical Israel, although of the physical seed/lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are actually counted by God as the spiritual children of God. Being a member of that physical seed/lineage is NOT what counted with God. What counted with God was if an individual, no matter whether Israelite or Gentile, had entered into God's promise; for children of God, the spiritual seed, are counted by God through His promise. So then, how does an individual enter into God's promise to be one of God's children? Romans 9:30-33 reveals the answer -- "What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone; as it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence; and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed." Indeed, Romans 10:8-13 further adds, "But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." _______________________________________________________ No, I understand the eternal salvation that we believers have in Christ. Yet I still contend that Genesis 3:15 is not talking about some "godly line." Genesis 3:15 is talking about a singular individual who can be described as the seed of the woman, as one who would bruise Satan's head, and as one whose heel Satan would bruise. Noting that Jesus the Christ was born of a virgin woman, and that seed is normally spoken as of a man, not a woman, we recognize that through His virgin birth Jesus Christ is that singular seed of the woman. Furthermore, we recognize that through His death on the cross, His heel was bruised by Satan, but also that through His sacrificial death and glorious resurrection, He bruised Satan's head. HE is the seed of the woman in Genesis 3:15. Certainly, God the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, is the Head of His spiritual body, the New Testament church; and certainly, we New Testament believers are the individual members of His spiritual body. However, nothing in the context of Genesis 3:15 indicates that it is speaking about this relationship. Rather, it is speaking strictly about God's promise of Satan's defeat through Christ and of Christ's work as the PROMISED SAVIOR. Certainly, according to Galatians 3:29 if we be Christ's through faith in Him, then we are counted by God spiritually as Abraham's seed and as God's own heirs according to promise. However, this does not make us in any manner the seed of the woman; for it only speaks about our being the seed of Abraham by being in Christ.

Indeed, because that is precisely what God's own Word says -- "ALL MEN" (Greek - "pasin anthropois"). The group that the word "all" in the verse is designating has already been defined by the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit -- "ALL MEN" (all mankind). Any denial thereof strikes against the authority of God the Holy Spirit Himself. (But I am sure that you will proceed to tell us that "all men" really means some group less than "all men." Yea, hath God said? But that is not what He really meant.) Yes, to all three questions, since they all are a part of the group defined by "ALL MEN." Actually, I admitted no such thing. What I actually said was: But I also added: Which means that I acknowledged that there indeed IS a way of knowing how this grace of God has appeared unto ALL MEN -- through the teaching of other passage of Scripture. (Note: I just did not proceed to share any of those other passages in the posting above, because I wanted to wait for your manner of response.)

Interesting. Iconoclast, you did not provide a single reference of Scripture to support your statement. You just provided your own emphatic declaration -- "period." If we take this statement at face value, then we would have to accept it upon your personal authority. Yet true doctrine is NOT founded on ANY man's authority. Rather, true doctrine is founded upon the absolute authority of God's Holy Word. So then, let us consider God's Word. Do we find the phrase "godly line" or the phrase "ungodly line" anywhere therein? While we certainly DO find the words "godly" and "ungodly" employed in God's Word to describe particular individuals and groups, we NEVER actually find either the phrase "godly line" or "ungodly line" in God's Word. Now, when the word "line" is used in the context of humanity, it generally means "lineage; the descendants of a common ancestor." If such was your intended usage for the term in your declaration, then it would have been better to use actual Biblical terminology, such as that there are two spiritual families -- the children of God and the children of disobedience. So, in Genesis 3:15 the singular seed of the woman is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ. Furthermore, through faith in Christ believers may indeed be called Abraham's seed (as per Galatians 3:29). However, this still does NOT mean that believers are the seed of the WOMAN in Genesis 3:15. Indeed, Genesis 3:15 has nothing to do with a "godly line." Rather, it has to do with a PROMISED SAVIOR.

Yea, hath God said? Titus 2:11 -- "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to ALL MEN." First, in this verse it is NOT a truth that has appeared unto all men. Rather, it is "the grace of God that bringeth salvation" which has appeared to all men. Second, the "all men" are precisely that -- "ALL MEN," all of mankind. Third, the verse itself does not tell us how "the grace of God that bringeth salvation" has "appeared to all men." It just reveals the fact for us to believe as God's Word has reported it. Indeed, for the answer to that question, we would need to consider other passages of Scripture. Yea, hath God said? But surely He did not mean what He actually said. (sarcasm warning)

The terms "actual" and "potential" as employed in the above questions are philosophical terminology. I would much rather employ Biblical terminology than philosophical terminology. So then: 1. Do I believe that God our Savior "will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth"? In accord with 1 Timothy 2:3-4 -- "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." -- I boldly answer, "Yes." 2. Do I believe that our Lord Jesus Christ "gave himself a ransom for all [mankind]"? In accord with 1 Timothy 2:5-6 -- "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time." -- I boldly answer, "Yes." 3. Do I believe that "the grace of God" which "bringeth salvation" has indeed "appeared to all men"? In accord with Titus 2:11 -- "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to ALL MEN." -- I boldly answer, "Yes." 4. Do I believe that Jesus Christ "is the propitiation," not only for the sins of believers, "but also for the sins of the whole world"? In accord with 1 John 2:2 -- "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD." -- I boldly answer, "Yes."

The question above is a faulty question. In Genesis 3:15 the seed of the woman is further described with the singular pronouns "it" and "his." Thus the seed of the woman as presented in this context is NOT a "godly line," but is a singular male individual; and we know that the singular male individual who bruised Satan's head and whose heel Satan bruised is none other than our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself. It should be noted that with your question above you employ the plural word "seeds;" whereas the Holy Spirit inspired grammar of Genesis 3:15 only employs the singular word "seed."

Mr. Iconoclast, On the right-hand side of one of your posts there is the three dots. If you click on those three dots for one of your own posts, you will get a drop down with "report," "share," and "edit." Click "edit."

John 1:9 -- "That was the true Light, which lighteth EVERY MAN that cometh into the world." John 12:32 -- "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men unto me." Romans 5:18b -- "Even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life." 1 Timothy 2:3-6 -- "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for ALL, to be testified in due time." 1 Timothy 4:10 -- "For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of ALL MEN, specially of those that believe." Titus 2:11 -- "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to ALL MEN." 1 John 2:2 -- "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD." I wonder -- Is it "grammatical double-speak" for us to quote God's Holy Word as it is directly written under the specific inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, and then to accept it to be the very truth as it is so written? Or, is it "double-speak" to claim that what is directly written in God's Holy Word under the specific inspiration of God the Holy Spirit does not really mean what it actually says?

Actually, the pronouns of the three phrases in the second half of 2 Peter 3:9 are not the same, and thus it is not grammatically necessary that they be equivalent to one another: 1. But is longsuffering to us-ward 2. Not willing that any should perish 3. But that all should come to repentance However, the context of 1 Timothy 2:1-6 places even greater emphasis upon the point: "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom FOR ALL, to be testified in due time." Indeed, the Biblical view of God our Savior is that He graciously desires for all men to be saved, and gracious draws all men unto Christ, but that He has established the gracious plan that each sinner must willingly respond to His gracious drawing and must willingly receive Christ through faith as personal Savior. Revelation 22:17 -- "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." Indeed, the Calvinistic system of belief would have us to believe that the Lord God is interested only in saving some sinners, but is not interested at all whatsoever in saving the rest, that He desires to save some and certainly saves those, but has no actual desire to save any of the rest, that every lost sinner who shall spend eternity under God's wrath in the lake of fire shall be there because God simply had no desire of love, grace, or mercy at all to save them and thus did not provide any way whatsoever for their salvation. Therefore, the Calvinistic system of belief presents a doctrine of abundant divine grace for some, but also presents a doctrine of utter divine hatred for the rest.