Rhema
Active
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2021
- Messages
- 3,610
And you have done nothing more than given an uneducated personal opinion. Any deceit is self-evident.You have handled the word deceitfully !
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
SignUp Now!And you have done nothing more than given an uneducated personal opinion. Any deceit is self-evident.You have handled the word deceitfully !
There is no discussion, @Christ4Ever. Nothing within BF's thread here has ever amounted to a discussion. It is nothing more than a didactic diatribe (see below).attributing the word deceit to each other is not contributing to this discussion
I have not chosen a "side." I have explained what the language itself overtly states - in both English and Greek - an explanation that any sane, education person would accept. There are not two "sides" to truth. And for some reason you seem to believe that the "righteous" thing to do in any contention is to scold both parties. It's a pretty woke ideology, where everyone gets a participation trophy, and nobody can ever be right because, at the end, Truth - absolute objective Truth doesn't exist. (No wonder our educational system is so messed up - along with the people whom it produces.) Human parents always make this mistake, thinking that peace is the goal, rather than Truth. A peace that serves the parents rather than the children. (Shut The Kids Up, I Just Want Some Peace and Quiet !!) Mediators always make this mistake, thinking that peacemaking automatically produces Truth, believing that compromise is the final goal of Truth. But Peacemakers are NOT blessed when they obliterate Truth.Both of you have chosen sides
The rules of grammar and the definition of words are NOT subject to any one individual's "interpretation." I would ask you read Post #308 - LINK again. It best explains my purposes here.it seems that you perceive the other's writing to be contrary to your own interpretation
Between you two, I agree it has stopped being a discussion a while back, but in the theme of the thread I'm sure there has been some gain by some.There is no discussion, @Christ4Ever. Nothing within BF's thread here has ever amounted to a discussion. It is nothing more than a didactic diatribe (see below).
Sure, you have. You and others who agree with you, would say that you have sided with providing the truth.I have not chosen a "side."
I would agree if that were what I am trying to accomplish. It's more of a referee's action, which is let's keep it clean. What I see is a stubbornness to see/admit that what one believes is incorrect as far as the topic is concerned, which doesn't necessarily mean they are deceivers as you believe them to be, except possible to themselves. Which is something other than intended by you both in the use of "deceit".A peace that serves the parents rather than the children. (Shut The Kids Up, I Just Want Some Peace and Quiet !!) Mediators always make this mistake, thinking that peacemaking automatically produces Truth, believing that compromise is the final goal of Truth. But Peacemakers are NOT blessed when they obliterate Truth.
Yes, you have on more than one occasion, if I may add. And you were gracious enough at that time to refrain from responding in like manner....for the most part.Yes, I've been accused of deceit.
As a fellow poster on this thread, I agree, but as a Moderator if the intent of your word selection had included what you explained above, I might not have responded as I did and would likely have let it pass without comment.Truth be told, I believe that BF is actually a victim of deceit (as defined above). Whether he has been deceived, or whether he has deceived himself, there certainly is deceitfulness going on, since he has continually hidden his supposed 30 years of study about the word δίδωμι by not posting what his claims are based upon. (Bible Hub didn't exist 30 years ago, and even then BF did not care to cite the quote.)
Truth is typically accorded to the specific content of theological assertions, at least within the purvue of this forum. When being taught 10th grade English, would any student debate the "truth" about grammar and definitions of words? I trow not. Who has ever taken a position that the dictionary is not true?Sure, you have. You and others who agree with you, would say that you have sided with providing the truth.
Those posts that have discussed deceit (at least on my part) were not about the topic of this thread, but rather about the rules of grammar and the definitions of words.What I see is a stubbornness to see/admit that what one believes is incorrect as far as the topic is concerned,
Yet I provided my definition of the word deceit, although saying "my" definition is absurd. No one owns the definition of a word. And the definition of that word deceit is "keeping the truth hidden, especially to get an advantage." I would politely suggest that you read through the posts from @Brightfame52 with regards to the word δίδωμι and you would see where said deceit occurs - where the truth regarding the definition and use of the word δίδωμι was kept hidden by my esteemed colleague to gain an advantage for his theological claims.which doesn't necessarily mean they are deceivers as you believe them to be,
Until it became necessary to point out the deceit - that which was hidden being the academic sources for BF's claims about the word δίδωμι. Or personal reasons for that matter (possibly examples even) instead of some vague appeal to 30 years of study.And you were gracious enough at that time to refrain from responding in like manner....for the most part.
When posting, I'm not typically inclined to provide definitions for all the words I use, unless those words come under scrutiny. I use words as I understand their definition, and would think others do the same. If a concern arises, we can always play dueling dictionaries.but as a Moderator if the intent of your word selection had included what you explained above, I might not have responded as I did
Sokay.Thank you for your response to my previous message. No further reply is necessary for this one.
But the election Paul speaks of is not salvation. It's the election of Israel.Jn 3:16
John 3:16
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Those God Loved in Jn 3:16, that world, had to be viewed by God as in Union with Christ Jesus, those Chosen in Him. For God's Love for any people is in Christ Jesus Rom 8:39
39Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
In the original " the Love of God " is thv agaphv tou qeou, as you can see it is preceded by the definite article, Identifying this as the exclusive Love of God, God has no other Love for men apart from His saving and Electing Purpose in Christ Jesus !
When writing about God's Purpose of Election in Rom 9, Paul writes in support of it by the comparing of the twins Jacob and Esau, to testify that it was Jacob that was God's Elect, he writes Rom 9:11-13
11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth )
12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
This makes it plain that God's Love is exclusively associated with His Purpose of Election, which Purpose is in Christ Jesus , which Love He Loved them because of being in Him by Election before the foundation Eph 1:4 and Jn 17:23-24
23I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
24Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
I challenge anyone to prove from scripture that the Love of God in Jn 3:16 is not the same exact Love of God in Rom 8:39. Now it would be above foolish to suppose that everyone in the world of Jn 3:16 was in Christ Jesus, but yet, would have to be if "so loved by God" 8
You've taken the passage out context. Here is how Paul starts his discussion.God does not Love all mankind without exception !
The False Teachers of our time and time past who teach that God loves all mankind without exception are nothing but deceivers and liars, for scriptures do teach the very opposite Rom 9:13
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Ps 5:5
5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
Now if God hates all the workers of iniquity, then they could not have been of that People of sinners that God so Loved Rom 5:8
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners [ workers of iniquity], Christ died for us.
Now, if these are the same as those in Ps 5:5, we have a major contradiction, so to avoid such, it is plainly taught that God does not Love all sinners, for some, as per Ps 5:5 He does hate, and they shall not stand in the day of Judgment, they have no Saviour provided for them ! As God's Love is Immutable and not subject to change, so is His hate for some immutable and not subject to change, for just as His Church is Loved with an everlasting love, His enemies are hated with an everlasting hatred as the edomites symbolized Mal 1:4
4 Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the Lord of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever.
They are the people of God's curse unto Judgment Isa 34:5
5 For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold, it shall come down upon Idumea, and upon the people of my curse, to judgment.
They all shall hear in the Great day Matt 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
FalseBut the election Paul speaks of is not salvation. It's the election of Israel.
Whenever a person is shown a scripture that gives us a truth, the person uses context as a excuse to not believe the scripture.You've taken the passage out context. Here is how Paul starts his discussion.
9 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were eaccursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ro 9.
Notice, that Paul is speaking of the Israelites. Notice that he says the adoption pertains to the Israelites. Notice he said that Christ came because of the promise to the Fathers. Who are the fathers? They are Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. What are the promises? They were four-fold, however, here is one of them
Abraham.
16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: 17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ge 22:15–18.
Isaac.
26 And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar. 2 And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: 3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ge 26.
Jacob.
10 And Jacob went out from Beer-sheba, and went toward Haran. 11 And he lighted upon a certain place, and tarried there all night, because the sun was set; and he took of the stones of that place, and put them for his pillows, and lay down in that place to sleep. 12 And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and descending on it. 13 And, behold, the LORD stood above it, and said, I am the LORD God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; 14 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.
The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ge 28:10–14.
God made the same promise to each of these men, the fathers. 'And in thy seed all of the nations of the earth shall be blessed.' So, who is the seed though which all nations would be blessed? The Seed is Christ.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
The Holy Bible: King James Version, Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2009), Ga 3:16.
Paul says that the Seed that was promised to Abraham is Christ. That's why in Romans 9 he says the promises belong to the fathers and it is because of these promises to the fathers that Christ came. So, as we can see this is not about people being chosen to be saved. Paul is explaining how God has elected Abraham, then Isaac, then Jacob, to be the men through whom He would fulfil His promise.
False. I'll rephrase your last post.Whenever a person is shown a scripture that gives us a truth, the person uses context as a excuse to not believe the scripture.
Nothing has changed, whenever a person doesnt want to believe a scripture truth, they will hollar context. All verses come from a particular context, thats nothing new.As a rule, when I quote a scripture Im famliar with the context in first place.False. I'll rephrase your last post.
Whenever a person is shown context for a scripture that gives us a truth, the person uses standalone verses as an excuse to not believe the whole of how it was meant to be understood.
Here's a little something to help you from a secular site, which can also apply to religious writings on why context is important for comprehension.
I hope you understand that this is how cults spring up, by ignoring context and coupling verses from all over the place (out of context) so that it can mean whatever they want it to mean, and not what was intended to be understood by God.
With the Love of Christ Jesus.
YBIC
Nick
\o/
<><
I am so sad to see you post this stuff, not using the discernment Yehovah built into you. Context is not an excuse, it is essential when reading anything written without verse and chapter numbers. The Scriptures did not have these division markers for better than 1300 years on the last 27 letters and the Jewish Bible/Old Testament for the last received for Hundreds of years and for the earliest, they were without numbers for thousands of years. Remove the man-made division and comprehension is simplified. This puts the cult makers out of business but, hey, that would be a good thing.Nothing has changed, whenever a person doesnt want to believe a scripture truth, they will hollar context. All verses come from a particular context, thats nothing new.As a rule, when I quote a scripture Im famliar with the context in first place.
Very true. Nobody who likes the context will hollar just as loud.Nothing has changed, whenever a person doesnt want to believe a scripture truth, they will hollar context. All verses come from a particular context, thats nothing new.As a rule, when I quote a scripture Im famliar with the context in first place.