Calvinism and Context?

[Bbrdrd]

I could explain the difference between the natural mans "faith" and the "gift of faith", which is supernatural but what would be the point. You write much but little is of Scripture teachings. You think you know much but most is foolishness before God. You are likened to this person: 2Ti 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. I know this sounds harsh on my part but sooner or later it has to be said.

Even a learned person, should be able to distinguish between the things we obtain in our natural birth and the things needed to equip one as a believer.

Right. You're full of bluster and accusations, yet when it comes to discussing Scripture in context you spoke of it as being "nit picky."

When you're ready to actually discuss what is present within Scripture, I'll be happy to oblige. But so long as you think your cherry-picked theology is the whole of Scripture you will never be able to truly understand the depth of the Bible's richness.

It's rather amusing to me how often rather than engaging in discussion and rebutting the things that I say the response is to elevate yourselves and your view of Scripture as unassailable, to equate your views with the plain text of Scripture, and to shut down conversations by putting yourselves in God's position and saying God is unquestionable. If your views were so strong, why would you need such tactics rather than defending them openly?

 

[posthuman]

I have to the assume then that you are asserting that you were saved and did not know the Gospel by what you keep repeating incessantly.

Scripture is clear faith comes by hearing....

you pointed out earlier that Christ "learned obedience" -- was He disobedient beforehand?
was there a period of time between birth and ~ 30 where Jesus was not the Savior of the world?

 

[EleventhHour]

you pointed out earlier that Christ "learned obedience" -- was He disobedient beforehand?
was there a period of time between birth and ~ 30 where Jesus was not the Savior of the world?

No, He was not disobedient

....Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
Hebrews 5:8-9

 

[dcontroversal]

The Calvinist will often say, Jesus only died for those whom God chose [as "His"] before time [before creation].

However, Romans 8:9b says this:

"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."


[the underlined is true of us before we come to faith in Christ; therefore the bold is true of us before and up to that point]





QFT. = )

Amen....ALL have been placed under that condemnation so that he may have mercy on all.....

Even when we were dead in sins and treapasses.......and what was the designation given....

And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled

ENEMIES is the word anf this blather they peddle of being saved prior to creation is absolutely being skewed to their flavor of religion....

The predetermined will of God is simple.....

Everyone that comes to me through my Son I WILL RECEIVE!

 

[posthuman]

Elihu speaks wrong when he says that sin only affects those around Job and Job himself, as sin is ultimately against God

the Bible has a couple questions for you on this topic:

If you sin, what do you accomplish against Him?​

Or, if your transgressions are multiplied, what do you do to Him?​

If you are righteous, what do you give Him?​

Or what does He receive from your hand? ​

​

 

[dcontroversal]

you pointed out earlier that Christ "learned obedience" -- was He disobedient beforehand?
was there a period of time between birth and ~ 30 where Jesus was not the Savior of the world?

How about flip the coin.....

You explain why God inspired the following.....

Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.

 

[Bbrdrd]

this is what Elihu tells him.

you accuse Elihu of wickedness for much less than what Job himself says, but God calls Job righteous

is it right? you tell me

And you infer to God's judgment of Elihu by implying he is righteous despite the silence in the text.

I am not accusing Elihu of anything, it is the text that primes the audience for such a view if we look to the tropes used in his introduction. There is a mixture in Elihu's words, both good and bad, but to judge him in either direction is to remove the ambiguity of the silence.

And his presentation is very ambiguous, as he does say many things that seem echoed by God. Yet every time he says something good he contradicts that with a statement that primes the audience to reject his words.

His youth and anger both prepare the reader to disregard him, which is why commentaries through the ages not just the Talmud but Christian commentaries as well, have been harsh on him.

You take the opposite extreme and completely ignore the presentation and posturing and ambiguity of his character. You stand to judge him righteous simply because the text is silent on him, but whether righteous or wicked is such your place? You decide.

 

[posthuman]

If you sin, what do you accomplish against Him?
Or, if your transgressions are multiplied, what do you do to Him?
If you are righteous, what do you give Him?
Or what does He receive from your hand?

this is Job 35:6-7 btw @Bbrdrd, what you are calling false speech & lies.
i'm not seeing it??

 

[Bbrdrd]

the Bible has a couple questions for you on this topic:

If you sin, what do you accomplish against Him?​

Or, if your transgressions are multiplied, what do you do to Him?​

If you are righteous, what do you give Him?​

Or what does He receive from your hand? ​

​

You quote Elihu's speech in defense of Elihu's speech?

 

[Bbrdrd]

this is Job 35:6-7 btw @Bbrdrd, what you are calling false speech & lies.
i'm not seeing it??

That's fine, as I said earlier if you don't see it you don't see it.

 

[posthuman]

I am not accusing Elihu of anything

lol.

ever since i pointed out that when you called likened CV5 to him, meaning it as an insult, that according to scripture it doesn't appear to be so insulting, you've spent the whole day trying to figure out a way to make it back into an insult. looking for Satan in the scripture, instead of looking for Christ.

 

[posthuman]

You quote Elihu's speech in defense of Elihu's speech?

you got an answer for him?

you said that's a pack of lies he says -- those 4 questions he asks.

explain?

 

[dcontroversal]

You quote Elihu's speech in defense of Elihu's speech?

The funny thing about Job....God rebukes Job, all three of Job's older friends as wrong and the only one he does not rebuke is the young whipper snapper that held his tongue until the end and then spoke after the 4 (wiser) old men .....

 

[posthuman]

His youth and anger both prepare the reader to disregard him

fortunately for us, the Bible is pretty explicit as to why he is angry. ch. 32 vv. 1-5 or 6.

do you find fault in what is given as his indignation?
is it righteous or is it evil?

 

[Bbrdrd]

lol.

ever since i pointed out that when you called likened CV5 to him, meaning it as an insult, that according to scripture it doesn't appear to be so insulting, you've spent the whole day trying to figure out a way to make it back into an insult. looking for Satan in the scripture, instead of looking for Christ.

I've stood by exactly what I said in that post, which is the structure of the book as an Ancient Near East trial and Elihu not having a place to speak but choosing to speak for God. You're asking me to look to the speech itself and pick it apart for where Elihu elevates himself, which I would except it's clear from your posturing you're looking not to discuss different views of Scripture but to prove yourself right, a game I'm not interested in engaging in.

 

[posthuman]

The funny thing about Job....God rebukes Job, all three of Jod's older friends as wrong and the only one he does not rebuke is the young whipper snapper that held his tongue until the end and then spoke after the 4 (wiser) old men .....

it's really amazing. i never actually gave it much thought until this morning -- was catching up and saw his name and i was like, wait, i can't remember that. i need to read it.

this is a really remarkable figure in the Bible, tbh -- we're not at the bottom of figuring him out, for sure

 

[awelight]

Right. You're full of bluster and accusations, yet when it comes to discussing Scripture in context you spoke of it as being "nit picky."

When you're ready to actually discuss what is present within Scripture, I'll be happy to oblige. But so long as you think your cherry-picked theology is the whole of Scripture you will never be able to truly understand the depth of the Bible's richness.

It's rather amusing to me how often rather than engaging in discussion and rebutting the things that I say the response is to elevate yourselves and your view of Scripture as unassailable, to equate your views with the plain text of Scripture, and to shut down conversations by putting yourselves in God's position and saying God is unquestionable. If your views were so strong, why would you need such tactics rather than defending them openly?

Well let's see...... maybe because every time a discussion about Scripture is truly underway, attempts through human logic and understanding try to take precedence over a true genuine discussion. All of us have seen the posts, coming from you and others, who use every means at their disposal to try and shut up the ones who are honoring God and debasing man. If you are any else was truly interested in the Truth, you would be curious as to why this or that Doctrine, has been developed. The truth is, you don't like it because it debases man and you can't stand having your own foolish pride attacked. You say nothing that honors God and gives Him the Glory. Instead you attempt to elevate creation to the level of the Creator. You claim a love of God but defend man's rights at every turn. You can't have it both ways. Your thinking is circular but it travels in the wrong direction.

As I said earlier, everything starts from God, goes to man, returns to God. It does not start from man, goes to God and returns to man. If you don't see the truth in this, then you have not God. This is the teaching from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21

 

[posthuman]

Elihu not having a place to speak

if we accept your extra-Biblical narrative, then neither of Job's 3 friends have a place to speak either - so they should all 4 be rebuked by God.

Eliphaz, Bildad & Zophar are rebuked by Job, by Elihu and by God. Elihu is not rebuked by anyone in the scripture. that is significant.

the "trial" takes place in heaven in chapter 1. God is not on trial before men. that's one of Elihu & God's points. men don't have place to demand an account of God -- and that's the relevance to the thread.

 

[EleventhHour]

Well let's see...... maybe because every time a discussion about Scripture is truly underway, attempts through human logic and understanding try to take precedence over a true genuine discussion. All of us have seen the posts, coming from you and others, who use every means at their disposal to try and shut up the ones who are honoring God and debasing man. If you are any else was truly interested in the Truth, you would be curious as to why this or that Doctrine, has been developed. The truth is, you don't like it because it debases man and you can't stand having your own foolish pride attacked. You say nothing that honors God and gives Him the Glory. Instead you attempt to elevate creation to the level of the Creator. You claim a love of God but defend man's rights at every turn. You can't have it both ways. Your thinking is circular but it travels in the wrong direction.

As I said earlier, everything starts from God, goes to man, returns to God. It does not start from man, goes to God and returns to man. If you don't see the truth in this, then you have not God. This is the teaching from Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21

WOW all wrong.

YOUR doctrine debases God... plain and simple

 

[awelight]

That's fine, as I said earlier if you don't see it you don't see it.

Cop out.