OK! here goes. For God so loved the world [BELIEVERS ONLY] that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever [meaning the BELIEVERS ONLY] believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. [John 3:16] Who are the BELIEVERS ONLY. Here's a short list.
1) Calvinists only
2) The elect only
3) Mark Kielar only (together, of course, with all his Calvinistic buddies only: John MacArthur, Paul Washer, James White, RC Sproul, Robert Morey, Mark Driscoll).
Could not "elect" also mean all those truly in Christ as opposed to predestination? Why doesn't anyone ever speak of the root of "elect"? I am not trying to trap for I don't konw, I am honestly asking.
LMAO... "In a sense, yes, and in a sense, no".... That is the exact bs ambivalence we already found in Calvin's writings... "God wills and God wills not at the same time".
this guys a bum...how embarrassed knowledgeable calvinists must be with this video. i'm just waiting to get a chance to trade talking points with these "great minds" They'd get lit up.
this guys a bum...how embarrassed knowledgeable calvinists must be with this video. i'm just waiting to get a chance to trade talking points with these "great minds" They'd get lit up.
I dont usually comment on sites like this but i find this video abit disturbing and confusing..I wasnt a believer before i became a Christian, i converted to Christ..I was therefore, an unbeliever whom Christ died for..The very nature of the conversion to Christ lends to the standard understanding of God so love the World (World, being, everyone on earth)...Everyone is offered Christ's sacrificial love not just some..There is a verse which states we are grafted into the natural branch..
@shinesmile77 "the World (World, being, everyone on earth)" - If you look at 0:18 (18 seconds into the video) there is the Strong's Concordance contain other passages using the Greek word "Kosmos". At Section 8a it says "of Believers only" along with scripture passages from John and Corinthians. It would be helpful to look at how the same writer (John) used the same word elsewhere (John 1:29 & John 6:33) and then you can safely draw your conclusion. All converted ones were once unbelievers.
Then we need to have a NEW WRITTEN WORD that means what is means...
and not something twisted...all is not all when is says all...world is not world when it says world...so re write, cause as i see it. either you have to have a PHD to understands GODS word in the Greek or Hebrew or any other translation or GOD is playing a game with words...or maybe MAN is playing games with words...last point is sin sin when it says sin?
@Ogram1000 You make an interesting point. However the Bible DOES mean what it means. All means all and world means world. It's just that the Greeks or Hebrews express things differently than we do. They have 8 ways of using "Kosmos" (world) while English has one - thus the confusion. For "all" we add words to all to define its context like "all kinds of..." while the Greeks or Hebrews will give you the context in the previous paragraph and then just say "all". There's only one way of saying sin.
I spoke with an representative/developer of an online Bible study website about Keilar's resource shown on the video and he said, "I reviewed the remarks of yourself and [the Greek scholar with whom I am acquainted] and consulted with Brandon, another of our team members, and we've come to agree with you that the 'of believers only' doesn't belong in the lexicon entry for 'kosmos'. I'll talk to the boss and see whether or not this is something we are allowed to remove..."
Well, I have Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, and I can tell you he is dead wrong. Thayer does give eight meanings, but none of them contain the sub-meaning of “believers only”. Even more, John 3:16 is listed under meaning 5, which is “the inhabitants of the world.” I suspect this was copied off the internet, since several sites seem to attribute this to Thayer, but I have the actual lexicon. You would be hard pressed to find a lexicon that agrees with him.
@rpavich I have the printed version of Thayer's which disagrees with the online version. Obviously, Thayer did not produce the online version. I also have the full Thayer's in Bibleworks, which agrees with the printed version. It raises a question about what is the source of the online version.
@randersonzz Regarding your question fo the source, whatever it is, it is obviously fraudulant; no Greek scholar, as far I I know, defines/refers "kosmos" as "believers only". You'll also find this online "lexicon" in many other Bible study sites, which is a pity since it is so misleading. My guess is that someone, without any adequate knowledge of Biblical Greek (if any), just copied Thayer's order of definitions and added 8b; and Keiler research seems inept at this point.
I used to always think that the verse meant that God loved the world as in Jew AND Gentile rather than only Jew. I used to think that when they said that "for God so loved the world" it was, "for God so loved *Jew and Gentile* that whosoever..." Guess I was wrong.
@HDell1994 No, you're not wrong. Jn 3:16 expresses God's love, shown at the Cross, for all men, Jew and Gentile. The video is misleading and their use of the lexicon is, whether consciously or unconsciously I don't know, deceptive. The "Greek experts" do not say what they claim but say the very opposite. Do not go by the online lexicons; they've been manipulated.
@HDell1994 I suggest you scroll down and read my comments objecting to the claims made. This video is very, very misleading and claims that the "Greek experts" say what they actually do not say at all but, rather the opposite.
Thayer makes no mention at all of "believers only" as a definition iof "kosmos". Keilar either knows this but refuses to admit his error or he does not know it and has not made a firsthand investigation of the validity of his statement. In either case, his method of teaching is suspect.
@nbanuchu Well I can't figure out a way to post a link, so just type into google, "Kosmos Greek Lexicon" and click the link on the "searchgodsword" website
@HDell1994 Thanks for the link, unfortunately, it shows the same electronic "lexicon" as that in the video, in the Blue Letter Bible and other websites. This electronic version is a distortion of Thayer's; it follows Thayer's outline except that Thayer does not include 8a/b. As such, the electronic lexicon is very misleading (as well as this video), I assume, in order to maintain a theological position. If you'd like, you can Email me your thoughts on Jn 3:16: nbanuchi@gmail.com.
@nbanuchu Unfortunately, the problem with this video is that, if he is comparing vereses as to not isolate one from another, he is doing it on falsely held propositions, that is, that "kosmos" refers to "believers only" and that such a definition is supported by "Greek experts" (which it is definitely not). The electronic lexicon used in the video is misleading and erred.
@rpavich I have many language references and none of them support the meaning of "kosmos" as claimed on the video. I have neither the BDAG or Louw. If you can reference the page number and point to where they define "kosmos" as "believers only", I may be able to forward it to some Greek scholars who I am personally acquainted with and they can advise me whether it agrees with Keilar's claim. You can also Email me a copy of the page(s) for both books at nbanuchi@gmail.com; it would help a lot.
@nbanuchu i have 2 references, though i am not a scholar or even educated in greek at all. i will send them to your email. they are from the logos bible software
@nbanuchu i thought i did send them, and actually i thought u looked at them, because is your email to me, u commented on one. the references that i sent were just relating to the word kosmos and its defanitions. sorry if i gave the wrong impression regarding what i was going to send u. the only 2 that i have are both on my bible software. did u want the names of those?
Nelson...evidently this horse is still alive..As we discussed privately; his source was Strong's Enhanced Lexicon.
And as I pointed out...(but you refused to acknowledge) that I analyzed the passages marked as "believers only" and showed how grammatically they must be referencing believers...as the grammar of the Greek won't allow otherwise.
I can see why you didn't challenge that as you don't have any knowledge of the Greek language.
@rpavich If the "Greek experts themselves" as (Keiler and you claim) define or reference "kosmos" as "believers only", again, it must be asked, why have you not named any? I have provided a few scholarly language works wherein these "Greek experts themselves" do not support Keilar's assertion. As stated, my argument is not one of exegesis but of accurate information, which it seems (as I have read not a few of the "Greek experts themselves"), which Keiler is not providing.
Well, as I mentioned in private and here; the resource that Pastor Keiler is using is Strong's Enhanced Lexicon; Published by Logos Research; author is James Strong. It also says "Definitions are found in Strong's Expanded Dictionary" and that resource is credited to James Strong and Robert P. Kendall and can be purchased at Amazon.
I thought this horse was dead? that's what you said.
@rpavich Correction: What Keilar is using is not authored by Strong; it's not even edited by Strong. He published his concordance in 1890 (which kind of makes me doubt he'd still be alive to author the Enhanced Lexicon version"...of course, miracles do happen). Those who published it used Strong's numbering system and followed the defintions outlined in Thayer (so it seems)...and, apparently, added their own embellishment, at least, with particular reference to "kosmos".
FYI...for the sake of the "readers" also...Pastor Kielar has training....just not "seminary attended" training. That has no bearing on whether he understands Koine Greek or not...it just says that he studied independently...more props to him as that's much harder to do.
@rpavich Yes, he taught himself...which makes his teaching understanding more questionable then one whose scholarship is documented and attested by peers.
@rpavich If his video is any indication, Keilar's use of one electronic lexicon to make an obviously erroneous assertion demonstrates an amateuristic program of research and an inept method of teaching; his "independent training" is sorely lacking...so it seems...
Wow...as I said before...for a person that doesn't know the first thing about the Greek language, you sure know a lot about what others do or don't know.
Or could it just be you have an agenda?....naaa... :)
@rpavich The last word I make on Keilar: (1) He makes a claim based on one dubious electronic resource that has no support when held against other scholarly resources. (2) His claim is immediately found to be erroneous, especially with specific reference to Thayer and Strong. (3) He lays claim that all the "Greek experts" are Christians, which shows he is unaware that Thayer is said to be unitarian. You don't need to be a "Greek expert" to recognize when one makes an erroneous claim.
1.) If the standard of belief is that it has to be more than one resource then we can all go home. Lexical evidence based on "popularity count" is faulty reasoning.
2.) Again...the material in Strong's Enhanced Lexicon credits Thayer. And his MISTAKEN mention of Strong's Concordance has been dealt with till I'm blue in the face...
3.) He never said that all Greek experts are Christians nor is that even a basis for contributing to a Lexicon.
I guess I don't have to mention that you've labeled the Strong's Enhanced Lexicon "dubious" with no apparent reason...
You cannot even exegete the text it cites to evaluate it's claim as you have no knowledge of the Greek Language yourself....
sounds like you have an agenda...
As I said...YOU and anyone else...just get ahold of me and you can have the list of these verses and my "mini-exegesis" of them to decide for yourself.
@rpavich His independent training is no indication that he has the grasp of NT Greek necessary for serious NT study. His video gives no indication that he is a "Greek expert" nor does his education. Any assertions he makes regarding NT Greek ought to be carefully weighed and examined because he has no credentials in the field. I'm not saying he is not capable; I am saying Keilar is not an authority.
@rpavich I own neither. maybe you can look up those resources and copy here (or Email to me) how they define "kosmos" with specific reference to Jn 3:16. Do they define "kosmos" as "believers only", also?
I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.
Who are these sheep? Its not clear!
Romans 10:9
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
@VindicatedVigilante Well it is actually made clear in the Scriptures, take a look at Matthew 10:5-6, and you'll see that in verse six, Jesus says,"but rather go to the LOST SHEEP of the house of Israel." Jesus was commanding the disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the "lost sheep." So "who are these sheep?" you ask? Those sheep are God's elect who Jesus calls us to proclaim the Gospel to so that they may be saved. Really read it for yourself and think about, it should all make sense. God Bless.
@HDell1994 Here you are wrong. You are misapplying the text. The "lost sheep" referred to here are the people of Israel. Jesus already qualifies what he means: "house OF Israel." This has nothing to do with the Calvinsitic notion of "the elect".
@psk6565 Nevertheless, the question is what does the text say? Although now the elect people is the Church, Jew and Gentile< circumcised (I agree) of heart, Jesus reference to the "lost sheep" is to the Jewish people, especially those of the dispersion. As I stated, the intended meaning of the text has nothing to do with the Calvinistic notion of "elect".
I'm a Presbyterian and believe that definite redemption is what Scripture teaches - but Strong's Concordance doesn't define kosmos as "believers only" (it does note that it is used to describe the world both figuratively & literally though). John Piper explains this in a clearer, more biblical and reliable way. I used to think that this idea was unbiblical, but God humbled me and by His grace I found that what I thought was meant by "limited atonement" was entirely of my own ignorant imaginings
@vidcodex09 You got me curious. First, what had you imagined "limited atonement" to mean that you now say was from your "own...imaginings"; and second, how did Piper correct your view?
I have had friends suggest I look at this video. I waited with pen in hand. brother Mike opens; "The Greek experts themselves Strong's, Thayer's and so on... specifically cite John 3:16 as an example of when kosmos as referring to "believer's only" So if we cannot trust their definition here on John 3:16 why would we trust them else where?" I looked up the "experts" and only this source is make this claim. The others say "The whole cosmos of men." AT Robertson. So Mike is in error.
May I recommend that you look for a video by Don Fortner titled "Jesus shall not fail" which gives a quick and succinct explanation that I think might help to clarify the matter for him that has ears to hear.
A little sleight of hand here. If you noticed the website shown on the video (30 second mark) and compare it to Thayer's, you'll see that (1) there is no "8b" neither is "believers only" anywhere noted as a definition, and (2) Jn 3:16 is cited under definition #5 - "the inhabitants of the earth". The definitions shown in the website on the video were obviously doctored.
Im not sure that it is saying GOD hardens the heart activly but most likely passive. Meaning he withdraws his presence and men do what they do best Sin. I am not calvanist. I am not taking sides in any case here but find this teach compelling....
@donandshannon. How compelling can it be when in the first 37 seconds of the video he makes an erroneous statement regarding how the "Greek experts" define "world" citing Jn 3:16? Please read my other comments and check for yourself the validity of his statement. I mean, if you can't trust what he says here, why should you trust what he says elsewhere?
EVERYONE IS ELECTED TO BELIEVE. Think about this. The belief that only some are chosen is heresy. Romans 9:18 talks about God having mercy on whom he has mercy and hardening whom he will. One might say, "see, some are chosen to be saved and some are hardened." The problem is if this person believes in total depravity they have to realize that they're saying that God hardens the hearts of people that COULD NEVER be saved without being regenerated first. This makes no sense.
the other point I think he should make is that regardless of whether this particular passage means God loves the whole world down to every last human being (which he does, in a sense, because he shows his kindness every day by common grace and provision) -- that does not mean that this verse says Christ died for the sheep AND the goats. Lutherans have gone about as far as one can go away from Calvinism and still remain scriptural. But even most of them don't know their own doctrine.
LaneCh, I would like for you to explain how the video can make an ssertion regarding what the "Greek experts" cite when, in looking into the matter, there is no citation as claimed but rather the opposite is asserted? No "Greek expert," cites Jn 3:16, with reference to "kosmos," "to mean believers only". However, they do cit it as referring to the "inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race" (Thayer), wholly contrary to the claim made in the video. How do you explain that?
go to the blueletterbible site and look up john 3:16. Then click the C, which will show you the greek. Then click on the numbered entry for kosmos, which will bring up the 8 definitions.
Terriergal, the 8 definitions listed in the BLB are not Thayer's but were made by whoever set up the website. Scroll down to Thayer's lexicon, click on "Rest of the Entry", then scroll further down to point #5. Note how it reads citing Jn3:16. Read the entire entry by Thayer's. He mentions nothing regarding "all believers". You will find the same with Strong, TDNT, and Vine. The language references show the fallacy of the assertion made in the video regarding kosmos.
FYI, (1) Strong's should not be for academic use; it's usefulness is very limited, at least, this seems to be the scholarly opinion. Strong's provides different meanings of a Greek word, but offers no guidance as to which ought to be used for any particular verse. Therefore, (2) Strong's does NOT "specifically cite Jn 3:16 as an example when 'kosmos' or 'world' is referring to 'believers only'." Apparently, he not only makes a false statement but depends on a non-academic resource for support.
All words are based on context. "Cold feet" meaning nervous in the context of a wedding does not mean that it means nervous standing without socks or shoes in the snow. Read a dictionary. Many words and phrases have many different meanings depending upon context, nbanchu.
I agree with respect to words having different meanings. As the lexicons show, "kosmos" has a few meanings and it does depend on context how it is to be interpreted.. However, the Greek experts and the language references cited on the video do not support his argument as he contends; rather they argue against his assertions! He is falsifying information in order to maintain legitimacy to his beliefs.
If the world means the "only believers" in Jn 3:16, then it must be so for 15:18-19, reading "If the world (only believers) hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world (believers), the world (believers) would love its own; but because you are not of the world (believers), but I chose you out of the world (believers), therefore the world (believers) hates you"? Is this what happens when one "follow[s] basic, universally accepted Biblical hermenuetics"?
I think the context presented thus far, however brief, adequately demonstrates the problem inherent in defining "world" to mean "believers only" (a definition all lexicons at my disposal do not even suggest for Jn 3:16).
But how do we harmonize the idea God wants WHOSOEVER to be saved with John 6:65? If God is truly sovereign (Isa 43:13), and He wants every person saved, how can anyone be damned? As Paul asks in Ro 9:19 "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?"
Unfortunately, "8b" was added and is not from Thayer's resource (as one may be misled to believe). However, if you go to the BLB website (where Thayer's entry is in part), go to "Click here for the rest of the entry", and then scroll down to point #5, you will see that Jn 3:16 is cited under a definiton that contradicts what is being asserted in the video. If you check all the other sources used by the BLB, none cite Jn 3:16 as referring to "believers only".
God is truly sovereign and in his sovereignty he has chosen to grant to men the freedom to choose their own eternal destiny. Not all that God desires comes to pass, cf. Matt 23:37; Ezek 18:32. As such, there is no fault with God.
My objection is with the video making an erroneous assertion regarding how the "Greek experts" define world in Jn 3:16, I think it would be best if you checked out the claims first, whether it is true or not and let me know what you find
I have checked Strong's and Thayer's and they do not support his argument. I looked up two other language references and they, also, oppose his assertions. For example, Thayer's Lexicon reads, "the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race." He's obviously giving wrong information.
Putting to one side all the overwhelming evidence for the correct reading of John 3:16 as referring to those chosen by God, the reason I cannot accept the Arminian view is that it portrays God as a fumbling loser, who occasionally wins a soul, but spends most of His time watching those His Son died for falling happily into hell.
Scripture presents a God who NEVER fails, and whose love existed before the making of the world, is with us now, and will be forever.
Your idea of God's providence is obviously flawed (as well as, most likely, your understanding of Arminian teaching) and your reading of Jn 3:16, just like the video, is clearly erred. The "teacher" on the video is providing false information that can be easily ascertained by checking the language references he cited and other references he did not cite. Again, let's make note of something here, the Greek experts themselves wholly disagree with his interpretation of Jn 3:16.
mmh, I had never seen it that way...That's a good point indeed from this point of view. What about this though : 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (2Pet 3:9). Is "anyone" out of context too?
2Pet 3:8 gives the context of Peter's readers 'αγαπητοι'. All those God loves WILL be saved. He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4) He is God now and forever. No one can snatch you from Him or stand in His way. (isa 43:13) To Him the nations are far less than nothing; God controls the stars in the sky and everyone on this earth. When God does something, we cannot change it or even ask why. (Dan 4:35) There is no fear in love (1Jn 4:18), and God is love (1Jh 4:8)
Eph 1:4. Thise chosen from the foundation of the world, are not particular individuals at the exclusion of others but has reference to the kinds of persons chosen, that is, believers cf. v.12-13: "who first trusted in Christ...ye believed".
Calvinists can pervert the word of God all they want. But not only John 3:16 speaks the truth, the same truth is spoken in John 3:15, and in countless other verses. Whole Bible refutes Calvinism. People, read your Bible. If you end up in hell it is entirely your own fault. Don't let the Calvinists or Catholics read it for you. Read it yourself. And start with Matthew. Calvinism is Satanic doctrine which has agenda to see you in hell. Don't let them do it to you. Trust JESUS CHRIST. CALL HIS NAME
So, does the sinner suffer eternal torment for the same exact sins Christ already suffered for? Christ died for those whom God Almighty LOVED,because LOVE is an action not a sentiment. Can God love those whom His love is not effected on? We are commanded to love all even though we may not feel like it,because that is Gods nature. Yet our Love is not effected until we act. God acts on behalf of those He LOVES
Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God most High.
"world" in John 3:16 refers to all humanity whom God Almighty loved and gave his only begotten Son on their behalf yet only the elect would be enabled by his grace to believe in the name of the Lord Jesus and be saved. (I both disagree with Mark Keiler and disagree with him. Forgive me if I've misspelled his last name.)
May the God of all grace have mercy, grace, and peace upon you all. in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Well according to my understanding of John 3;16 Jesus make it clear ! Yes it`s true that God love the whole people not just christians , But people should responce toward God`s love for us to accept Jesus and turn from their wicked ways ! When i born , i born as a wordly person with evil mind and ways ! But i reliase where i`m and i accept God`s love for me and i believe in Jesus as my saver and I make Him Lord of my live !
"Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"- which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
If Jesus was God, then it would be the same as Jesus saying:
"Myself, Myself, why have you forsaken me?"
It doesn't make sense at all. Furthermore, Greek was not the bible's original language, HEBREW was. The bible hasn't remained it it's original language, and many verses have been altered Christians. Why? Because its not the word of God.
God is not a man, that he should lie, NOR a son of man, that he should change his mind.
God clearly does not become a man, in the above verse. How can you have a God become a man, and not become a man? It's contradictory for God to become a man, if you agree with Numbers 23:19.
If God became a man, don't you think this is a change? God is all-knowing, but Jesus was not.
Jesus said:
Mat 24:36:
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, NOR the Son, but only the Father.
Jesus here clearly admits that not even "he" knows the last hour, but ONLY God does. The triune God cannot "know the last hour" and "not know the last hour", simultaneously.
In john 3:16, the word "begotten" has been thrown out in new testament, by 32 Christian scholars, of the highest eminence, backed by 50 corporate Christian denominations .
Jeremiah 31:9 and also contradicts Exodus 4:22 and also Psalms 2:7. One place says Ephraim is God's firstborn, in another place, it says Jesus was the (only) son sacrificed, in another place says in:
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. v14. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
1John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
In John 1:1, the 1st time the word God is used, the stronger Greek word is "HO THEOS", which means "Divine God". However, the 2nd time the word God is used, it is a Greek word "TON THEOS" which means "a godly person" is used. (Greek translations)
From the CORRECT Greek manuscripts) reading of John 1:1 is:
"The beginning was the word, the word was with God, and the word was a godly person."
John 1:1, the Bible translators MISTRANSLATED this verse on purpose, and has deceived people.
ndoj74, In John 3:16, 32 Christians of the very highest eminence backed by 50 corporate denominations CONFIRMED that word "begotten" is a fabrication, an interpolation and "human handiwork."
There is not a single unambiguous verse in the whole Bible, where Jesus "HIMESELF" says: I am God or Worship me.
If you still consider Jesus to be God, you also have to agree that God felt hungry, in
Mark 11:12:
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Just because you believe something deeply does not mean it is right. I was born and raised in American Fundamentalism. On the topics of salvation and election fundamentalists default to Armenian theology. It is easier to deal with. After college I was challenged by a baptist pastor to learn to think for myself. Now, twelve years later, That journey has lead me to Reformed Theology; which I am studying now. Allow me to encourage all of you to study all points for yourselves.
Elect = will eventually believe or does believe now. It does not mean that they necessarily believe at this moment. There are many elect who do not believe right now. That is why evangelism is necessary. We don't know who the elect are. Only God knows that.
John 3:16 is just the reideration of 3:15 which really clears up the issue beacuse it does not have the word "Kosmos". It is the word for "all" , "all things" "the sum of all parts."
I find it funny that the man goes through so much trouble to talk about not pulling sciptures out of context and then does the exact same thing to proove his ponit. Kinda funny and I ronic. :-]
The context of John 3 is clear; v 15 'that WHOEVER believes...Why do Calvinists want to make this so difficult? Whosoever will, is the elect; whosoever won't is the non-elect.
msb0000: I will use your own words to reply to you (with a minor edit)
"The context of John 3 is clear; v 15 'that whoever BELIEVES...Why do non-Calvinists want to make this so difficult? Whosoever will, is the elect; whosoever won't is the non-elect."
So you see, msb0000, the context IS quite clear. And as the video rightly points out, the word 'kosmos' in this passage is referring to believers only. Whoever BELIEVES.
21c..there is no God else beside me; a JUST God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. (KJV)
In order for God to be JUST, He necessarialy has to give ALL the ability to FREELY CHOOSE to believe or to reject the gift of grace available to ALL PEOPLE. He would NOT do what He considers an ABOMINATION.
"In order for God to be JUST, He necessarialy has to give ALL the ability to FREELY CHOOSE to believe or to reject the gift of grace available to ALL PEOPLE."
So you believe that people deserve salvation? On what basis do they deserve it?
So you believe that people deserve salvation? On what basis do they deserve it?
No I believe we ALL DESERVE CONDEMNATION because ALL have sinned incl. you and I. A JUST God would give ALL OPPORTUNITY to go watch a baseball game. An UNJUST God would say you can come but to another say you can't.. That would be a contradiction to to God's justness, even a abomination to the very nature of a just God Himself.
21c..there is no God else beside me; a JUST God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. (KJV)
Do you accept the Bible teaches that God is a just God? If you do, then for God to not provide the same opportunity for ALL to become believers would be a contradiction to the very nature of a JUST God. Think of it. :)
Nucc3, if you do believe that we all deserve condemnation, then does it not follow that God would be perfectly just in sending us all straight to hell if He chose to do so? How can man at the same time both deserve the opportunity to be saved when he also deserves nothing but condemnation to begin with? Is that not like saying a murderer who deserves prison also deserves the opportunity to not go to prison if he but repents of what he's done?
We are saved by the grace of God ALONE, and not because of any choice or decision which somehow merits a salvation that we do not deserve. Our choice to follow and obey Christ necessarily results from the Spirit's miraculous regeneration of a sinner's heart, which only God can initiate through His sovereignty.
Does it not folow that God would be perfectly just in sending us all straight to hell if He chose to do so?
If yu think that is what a just God is then you wuld see that. Now say you had two sons who went on a murder rampage. Do you think God wuld be just in giving grace to one and sending the other to hell without even an opportunity to the same grace as the other son? Look at the verse again
Prov 11:1
1A false balance is an ABOMINATION to the LORD, but a JUST weight is His delight.
No. Sin separates us all from God. God's will saves a few (the elect) from eternal damnation. By choosing not to elect some, he leaves them to their own, showing his wrath and giving them what they deserve by sending them to hell as punishment.
I don't agree with this what this man is saying. He never validated anywhere that the word WORLD means just believers at all from context. The whe
John 3:16 "For God so loved the WORLD that he gave his one and only Son, that WHOEVER believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. If he insists on context, then he doesn't even have to go beyond the verse.
The invitation is extended to ALL MANKIND and WHOEVER believes will be saved.
Well, I'm not sure that his goal was to prove here that world means believers in this single video. What he was trying to do is show that just because it says "world", it doesn't necessarily mean that it is every single person who has ever lived and will ever will live. In fact, you haven't validated that the word "world" means that, either. (Also, "whosoever" isn't in the greek.)
Looking at the word WORLD which can take in the WHOLE "kosmos", I believe in this particular instance the word WHOSOEVER "pas" in the Greek implies the WHOLE OF PEOPLE meaning everybody,
It's like me saying speaking to EVERYBODY around me saying, I am going to watch a baseball game WHOSOEVER wants to come may watch it with me. Notice I don't exclude anybody. They FREELY choose if they want to come or not. What do you think? :)
"It's like me saying speaking to EVERYBODY around me saying, I am going to watch a baseball game WHOSOEVER wants to come may watch it with me. Notice I don't exclude anybody. They FREELY choose if they want to come or not. What do you think? :)"
Are you not familiar with the Calvinistic position? We affirm that. What we don't believe is that "whosoever" means that "ability". We don't differ on that. We differ on *why* one believes and another doesn't. Why do you believe and not your neighbor?
Also, your greek isn't good. "pas" means "all" in the greek. The literal translation of that phrase is "all the believing ones." Whosoever was put there in english translations simply for aesthetics (ie. "whosoever" looks better than "all the believing ones" in english.)
The words whoever, whosoever, and all can be interchangeable in the verse as the translations demonstrate without changing the meaning of the word. IOW
OK then let's see..You believe that man has a free will to choose if he wants to come and watch a ball game but yet some don't have the ability to come if he wants to? Where then is the free will to choose then? If God so loves the WORLD then ALL have the ability to freely choose do they not? If God doesn't give the ability to ALL then is God a just God?
Actually Peter is warning us against false teachings. Read the Chapter 1 into Chapter 2. God helps us, by the Holy Spirit (Paraclyte) to discern what is truth and what is not if we desire those things.
Why would God make man from His image then allow sin to destroy when Gods whole purpose and desire is to be with/have fellowship with Man as Jesus said "I chose you". He did not choose a few but for all because Adam and Eve chose to sin as Adam chose to name all the animals in the garden
Another real problem created by the doctrine of the divine sovereignty has to do with the will of man. If God rules His universe by His sovereign decrees, how is it possible for man to exercise free choice? And if he can not exercise freedom of choice, how can he be held responsible for his conduct? Is he not a mere puppet whose actions are determined by a behind-the-scenes God who pulls the strings as it pleases Him?
We are, by nature, sinners. That means we are totally depraved and can't choose God. We are totally responsible for sin because, although every human to ever live was born a sinner, we still violated the standards of a holy God. WE could never save ourselves by choosing Him. He had to choose us. There is no other way.
In the OT, only in Israel are the true worshipers of Jehovah, God looks for true worshipers and not just anybody else. God alone makes a difference for what do we have that we haven't receive. God does all things according to His pleasure and purpose and is not answerable to anyone. He exercises absolute sovereignty to all His creation. If you by faith can't receive such Highness then bow down to your reasoning.
Why worship a God who doesn't love all sinners? Are there any sinners who are different from others? Is God a respecter of persons? No, Jesus died for the elect, ACCORDING TO FOREKNOWLEDGE, and since God does know all things, He makes His decisions based on that knowledge, not on His arbitrary pleasure. I am a Christian and am guided by the Holy Spirit, so why do I not believe in Calvinism? Because man has a free will and is able to choose between God and the world, between salvation hell
will: the principle of volition that controls the inner vehicles
choice: consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action
With that said, please provide us with even one verse in Scripture that even alludes to the fact that man's will (not man's choice) is free.
OK! here goes. For God so loved the world [BELIEVERS ONLY] that He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever [meaning the BELIEVERS ONLY] believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. [John 3:16] Who are the BELIEVERS ONLY. Here's a short list.
1) Calvinists only
2) The elect only
3) Mark Kielar only (together, of course, with all his Calvinistic buddies only: John MacArthur, Paul Washer, James White, RC Sproul, Robert Morey, Mark Driscoll).
lessingtom 1 month ago
Great video! Thanks for posting!
sjennings86 3 months ago
Could not "elect" also mean all those truly in Christ as opposed to predestination? Why doesn't anyone ever speak of the root of "elect"? I am not trying to trap for I don't konw, I am honestly asking.
nicodemous52 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nicodemous52 I wil explain if your interested
ArthurCorp1 6 months ago
Joe Nunzio lol
bullmoose1969 7 months ago
LMAO... "In a sense, yes, and in a sense, no".... That is the exact bs ambivalence we already found in Calvin's writings... "God wills and God wills not at the same time".
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 9 months ago
this guys a bum...how embarrassed knowledgeable calvinists must be with this video. i'm just waiting to get a chance to trade talking points with these "great minds" They'd get lit up.
jarredkolvick 10 months ago
this guys a bum...how embarrassed knowledgeable calvinists must be with this video. i'm just waiting to get a chance to trade talking points with these "great minds" They'd get lit up.
jarredkolvick 10 months ago
I dont usually comment on sites like this but i find this video abit disturbing and confusing..I wasnt a believer before i became a Christian, i converted to Christ..I was therefore, an unbeliever whom Christ died for..The very nature of the conversion to Christ lends to the standard understanding of God so love the World (World, being, everyone on earth)...Everyone is offered Christ's sacrificial love not just some..There is a verse which states we are grafted into the natural branch..
shinesmile77 1 year ago
@shinesmile77 "the World (World, being, everyone on earth)" - If you look at 0:18 (18 seconds into the video) there is the Strong's Concordance contain other passages using the Greek word "Kosmos". At Section 8a it says "of Believers only" along with scripture passages from John and Corinthians. It would be helpful to look at how the same writer (John) used the same word elsewhere (John 1:29 & John 6:33) and then you can safely draw your conclusion. All converted ones were once unbelievers.
rrusco 10 months ago
Then we need to have a NEW WRITTEN WORD that means what is means...
and not something twisted...all is not all when is says all...world is not world when it says world...so re write, cause as i see it. either you have to have a PHD to understands GODS word in the Greek or Hebrew or any other translation or GOD is playing a game with words...or maybe MAN is playing games with words...last point is sin sin when it says sin?
Ogram1000 1 year ago
@Ogram1000 You make an interesting point. However the Bible DOES mean what it means. All means all and world means world. It's just that the Greeks or Hebrews express things differently than we do. They have 8 ways of using "Kosmos" (world) while English has one - thus the confusion. For "all" we add words to all to define its context like "all kinds of..." while the Greeks or Hebrews will give you the context in the previous paragraph and then just say "all". There's only one way of saying sin.
rrusco 10 months ago
I spoke with an representative/developer of an online Bible study website about Keilar's resource shown on the video and he said, "I reviewed the remarks of yourself and [the Greek scholar with whom I am acquainted] and consulted with Brandon, another of our team members, and we've come to agree with you that the 'of believers only' doesn't belong in the lexicon entry for 'kosmos'. I'll talk to the boss and see whether or not this is something we are allowed to remove..."
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Well, I have Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, and I can tell you he is dead wrong. Thayer does give eight meanings, but none of them contain the sub-meaning of “believers only”. Even more, John 3:16 is listed under meaning 5, which is “the inhabitants of the world.” I suspect this was copied off the internet, since several sites seem to attribute this to Thayer, but I have the actual lexicon. You would be hard pressed to find a lexicon that agrees with him.
randersonzz 1 year ago
@randersonzz
He seems to be referencing the online version found at a lot of websites...
It DOES SAY the following:
of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19
Direct cut and paste.
rpavich 1 year ago
@randersonzz
The online version of Thayer's says this:
8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort
a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)
b) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19
This is even besides the point...I'd throw Thayer's into the trash..its' 100 years old!
Try BDAG....better yet..check the context for yourself.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich I have the printed version of Thayer's which disagrees with the online version. Obviously, Thayer did not produce the online version. I also have the full Thayer's in Bibleworks, which agrees with the printed version. It raises a question about what is the source of the online version.
randersonzz 1 year ago
@randersonzz
Well, I was pointing out where I thought his reference came from, not validating his source...
Also, why care what Thayer's says? Thayer's is 100 years old...how about BDAG?
rpavich 1 year ago
@randersonzz Regarding your question fo the source, whatever it is, it is obviously fraudulant; no Greek scholar, as far I I know, defines/refers "kosmos" as "believers only". You'll also find this online "lexicon" in many other Bible study sites, which is a pity since it is so misleading. My guess is that someone, without any adequate knowledge of Biblical Greek (if any), just copied Thayer's order of definitions and added 8b; and Keiler research seems inept at this point.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
I used to always think that the verse meant that God loved the world as in Jew AND Gentile rather than only Jew. I used to think that when they said that "for God so loved the world" it was, "for God so loved *Jew and Gentile* that whosoever..." Guess I was wrong.
HDell1994 1 year ago
@HDell1994 No, you're not wrong. Jn 3:16 expresses God's love, shown at the Cross, for all men, Jew and Gentile. The video is misleading and their use of the lexicon is, whether consciously or unconsciously I don't know, deceptive. The "Greek experts" do not say what they claim but say the very opposite. Do not go by the online lexicons; they've been manipulated.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@HDell1994 I suggest you scroll down and read my comments objecting to the claims made. This video is very, very misleading and claims that the "Greek experts" say what they actually do not say at all but, rather the opposite.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
"For God so loved the world...." When John wrote this, most people
believed that the world was only the land that belonged to
the Roman Empire.I guess that means the rest of us are up the
creek without a paddle....putting it mildly.
jossalv1 1 year ago
I Corinthians 14:33
For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
MODERATECALVINISM 1 year ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Thayer makes no mention at all of "believers only" as a definition iof "kosmos". Keilar either knows this but refuses to admit his error or he does not know it and has not made a firsthand investigation of the validity of his statement. In either case, his method of teaching is suspect.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu Well I'm still studying on it myself, but please, take a look at this link.
HDell1994 1 year ago
@nbanuchu Well I can't figure out a way to post a link, so just type into google, "Kosmos Greek Lexicon" and click the link on the "searchgodsword" website
HDell1994 1 year ago
@HDell1994 Thanks for the link, unfortunately, it shows the same electronic "lexicon" as that in the video, in the Blue Letter Bible and other websites. This electronic version is a distortion of Thayer's; it follows Thayer's outline except that Thayer does not include 8a/b. As such, the electronic lexicon is very misleading (as well as this video), I assume, in order to maintain a theological position. If you'd like, you can Email me your thoughts on Jn 3:16: nbanuchi@gmail.com.
.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
I give this video a thumbs up. It is important to compare verses and not isolate one verse and ignore others.
DrStevenz 1 year ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu Unfortunately, the problem with this video is that, if he is comparing vereses as to not isolate one from another, he is doing it on falsely held propositions, that is, that "kosmos" refers to "believers only" and that such a definition is supported by "Greek experts" (which it is definitely not). The electronic lexicon used in the video is misleading and erred.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu Gotcha.
psk6565 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Quote:
The electronic lexicon used in the video is misleading and erred.
Yes...Strongs is not the best, but he's not wrong about what "kosmos" means...
check BDAG.
Yes...it IS supported by Greek experts...(not to mention an analysis of the occurrences of "kosmos" in the NT.)
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich I have many language references and none of them support the meaning of "kosmos" as claimed on the video. I have neither the BDAG or Louw. If you can reference the page number and point to where they define "kosmos" as "believers only", I may be able to forward it to some Greek scholars who I am personally acquainted with and they can advise me whether it agrees with Keilar's claim. You can also Email me a copy of the page(s) for both books at nbanuchi@gmail.com; it would help a lot.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
So your claim is that kosmos is never used in reference to believers only?
I just want to be clear.
rpavich 1 year ago
@nbanuchu i have 2 references, though i am not a scholar or even educated in greek at all. i will send them to your email. they are from the logos bible software
33razorbacks 1 year ago
@33razorbacks I've not yet received any references from you...or did I miss it somewhere?
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu i thought i did send them, and actually i thought u looked at them, because is your email to me, u commented on one. the references that i sent were just relating to the word kosmos and its defanitions. sorry if i gave the wrong impression regarding what i was going to send u. the only 2 that i have are both on my bible software. did u want the names of those?
33razorbacks 1 year ago
@rpavich You said, "Yes...it IS supported by Greek experts..." My question: which ones? You haven't named any.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Nelson...evidently this horse is still alive..As we discussed privately; his source was Strong's Enhanced Lexicon.
And as I pointed out...(but you refused to acknowledge) that I analyzed the passages marked as "believers only" and showed how grammatically they must be referencing believers...as the grammar of the Greek won't allow otherwise.
I can see why you didn't challenge that as you don't have any knowledge of the Greek language.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich If the "Greek experts themselves" as (Keiler and you claim) define or reference "kosmos" as "believers only", again, it must be asked, why have you not named any? I have provided a few scholarly language works wherein these "Greek experts themselves" do not support Keilar's assertion. As stated, my argument is not one of exegesis but of accurate information, which it seems (as I have read not a few of the "Greek experts themselves"), which Keiler is not providing.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Well, as I mentioned in private and here; the resource that Pastor Keiler is using is Strong's Enhanced Lexicon; Published by Logos Research; author is James Strong. It also says "Definitions are found in Strong's Expanded Dictionary" and that resource is credited to James Strong and Robert P. Kendall and can be purchased at Amazon.
I thought this horse was dead? that's what you said.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich Correction: What Keilar is using is not authored by Strong; it's not even edited by Strong. He published his concordance in 1890 (which kind of makes me doubt he'd still be alive to author the Enhanced Lexicon version"...of course, miracles do happen). Those who published it used Strong's numbering system and followed the defintions outlined in Thayer (so it seems)...and, apparently, added their own embellishment, at least, with particular reference to "kosmos".
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
I realize that James strong is dead, but his works have been re-issued since then so unless you're making the claim that:
1.) the current Strongs concordance is EXACTLY WORD FOR WORD as it was 100 years ago
2.) No work can be updated...ever.
Then you don't have a point at all.
I REALIZE that you don't like it...that I get...I REALIZE that this is your pet peeve.....
But that's about as far as it goes....
And as I said...an analysis is available to all who want it.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich Horse is dead. So is Strong...
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@rpavich FYI, again, I am only responding for the sake of those reading these comments.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Lol....I think not only do they get it...they must be tired of it...
They can contact me through my youtube account if they want to see my short exposition of the passages in question and decide for themselves...
rpavich 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
FYI...for the sake of the "readers" also...Pastor Kielar has training....just not "seminary attended" training. That has no bearing on whether he understands Koine Greek or not...it just says that he studied independently...more props to him as that's much harder to do.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich Yes, he taught himself...which makes his teaching understanding more questionable then one whose scholarship is documented and attested by peers.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Comment removed
rpavich 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Lol...that's funny coming from someone who knows nothing about what Pastor Kielar knows or about Koine Greek at all!
Way to slam someone without the slightest bit of evidence...
You're grasping at straws....sorry...
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich If his video is any indication, Keilar's use of one electronic lexicon to make an obviously erroneous assertion demonstrates an amateuristic program of research and an inept method of teaching; his "independent training" is sorely lacking...so it seems...
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Nice...amaturestic...inept...
Wow..you are good....from:
1.) Calling Strong's Enhanced Lexicon "Strong's concordance"
2.) Being taught outside of a seminary setting.
You can come to the conclusion that hes"
1.) Inept
2.) amaturestic at research
Wow...as I said before...for a person that doesn't know the first thing about the Greek language, you sure know a lot about what others do or don't know.
Or could it just be you have an agenda?....naaa... :)
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich The last word I make on Keilar: (1) He makes a claim based on one dubious electronic resource that has no support when held against other scholarly resources. (2) His claim is immediately found to be erroneous, especially with specific reference to Thayer and Strong. (3) He lays claim that all the "Greek experts" are Christians, which shows he is unaware that Thayer is said to be unitarian. You don't need to be a "Greek expert" to recognize when one makes an erroneous claim.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
1.) If the standard of belief is that it has to be more than one resource then we can all go home. Lexical evidence based on "popularity count" is faulty reasoning.
2.) Again...the material in Strong's Enhanced Lexicon credits Thayer. And his MISTAKEN mention of Strong's Concordance has been dealt with till I'm blue in the face...
3.) He never said that all Greek experts are Christians nor is that even a basis for contributing to a Lexicon.
One thing I know...you have an agenda.
rpavich 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
I guess I don't have to mention that you've labeled the Strong's Enhanced Lexicon "dubious" with no apparent reason...
You cannot even exegete the text it cites to evaluate it's claim as you have no knowledge of the Greek Language yourself....
sounds like you have an agenda...
As I said...YOU and anyone else...just get ahold of me and you can have the list of these verses and my "mini-exegesis" of them to decide for yourself.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich His independent training is no indication that he has the grasp of NT Greek necessary for serious NT study. His video gives no indication that he is a "Greek expert" nor does his education. Any assertions he makes regarding NT Greek ought to be carefully weighed and examined because he has no credentials in the field. I'm not saying he is not capable; I am saying Keilar is not an authority.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu
Quote:
The electronic lexicon used in the video is misleading and erred.
Then go to BDAG...check there. Or Louw Nida....whatever you choose...
Hes' not lying.
rpavich 1 year ago
@rpavich I own neither. maybe you can look up those resources and copy here (or Email to me) how they define "kosmos" with specific reference to Jn 3:16. Do they define "kosmos" as "believers only", also?
nbanuchu 1 year ago
John 10:16
I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.
Who are these sheep? Its not clear!
Romans 10:9
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Philippians 2:11
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
VindicatedVigilante 1 year ago
@VindicatedVigilante Well it is actually made clear in the Scriptures, take a look at Matthew 10:5-6, and you'll see that in verse six, Jesus says,"but rather go to the LOST SHEEP of the house of Israel." Jesus was commanding the disciples to proclaim the Gospel to the "lost sheep." So "who are these sheep?" you ask? Those sheep are God's elect who Jesus calls us to proclaim the Gospel to so that they may be saved. Really read it for yourself and think about, it should all make sense. God Bless.
HDell1994 1 year ago
@HDell1994 Here you are wrong. You are misapplying the text. The "lost sheep" referred to here are the people of Israel. Jesus already qualifies what he means: "house OF Israel." This has nothing to do with the Calvinsitic notion of "the elect".
nbanuchu 1 year ago
@nbanuchu Is Israel people born of Israeli blood? In Scripture, Israel is considered people circumsized of the heart, not of the flesh.
psk6565 1 year ago
@psk6565 Nevertheless, the question is what does the text say? Although now the elect people is the Church, Jew and Gentile< circumcised (I agree) of heart, Jesus reference to the "lost sheep" is to the Jewish people, especially those of the dispersion. As I stated, the intended meaning of the text has nothing to do with the Calvinistic notion of "elect".
nbanuchu 1 year ago
I'm a Presbyterian and believe that definite redemption is what Scripture teaches - but Strong's Concordance doesn't define kosmos as "believers only" (it does note that it is used to describe the world both figuratively & literally though). John Piper explains this in a clearer, more biblical and reliable way. I used to think that this idea was unbiblical, but God humbled me and by His grace I found that what I thought was meant by "limited atonement" was entirely of my own ignorant imaginings
vidcodex09 1 year ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vidcodex09 You got me curious. First, what had you imagined "limited atonement" to mean that you now say was from your "own...imaginings"; and second, how did Piper correct your view?
nbanuchu 1 year ago
I have had friends suggest I look at this video. I waited with pen in hand. brother Mike opens; "The Greek experts themselves Strong's, Thayer's and so on... specifically cite John 3:16 as an example of when kosmos as referring to "believer's only" So if we cannot trust their definition here on John 3:16 why would we trust them else where?" I looked up the "experts" and only this source is make this claim. The others say "The whole cosmos of men." AT Robertson. So Mike is in error.
jerlteets 1 year ago
May I recommend that you look for a video by Don Fortner titled "Jesus shall not fail" which gives a quick and succinct explanation that I think might help to clarify the matter for him that has ears to hear.
HermitintheRain 1 year ago
Thank you Lane. I support all you've said and you've said it well and with gentleness.
UrbanGypsy2 2 years ago
This guy is so smug.
I happen to know that he is unelect and hellbound.
Yeah thats right, I know the mind of God better than all yall.
gcarter214 2 years ago
A little sleight of hand here. If you noticed the website shown on the video (30 second mark) and compare it to Thayer's, you'll see that (1) there is no "8b" neither is "believers only" anywhere noted as a definition, and (2) Jn 3:16 is cited under definition #5 - "the inhabitants of the earth". The definitions shown in the website on the video were obviously doctored.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Im not sure that it is saying GOD hardens the heart activly but most likely passive. Meaning he withdraws his presence and men do what they do best Sin. I am not calvanist. I am not taking sides in any case here but find this teach compelling....
donandshannon 2 years ago
@donandshannon. How compelling can it be when in the first 37 seconds of the video he makes an erroneous statement regarding how the "Greek experts" define "world" citing Jn 3:16? Please read my other comments and check for yourself the validity of his statement. I mean, if you can't trust what he says here, why should you trust what he says elsewhere?
nbanuchu 2 years ago
EVERYONE IS ELECTED TO BELIEVE. Think about this. The belief that only some are chosen is heresy. Romans 9:18 talks about God having mercy on whom he has mercy and hardening whom he will. One might say, "see, some are chosen to be saved and some are hardened." The problem is if this person believes in total depravity they have to realize that they're saying that God hardens the hearts of people that COULD NEVER be saved without being regenerated first. This makes no sense.
rayh3777 2 years ago
the other point I think he should make is that regardless of whether this particular passage means God loves the whole world down to every last human being (which he does, in a sense, because he shows his kindness every day by common grace and provision) -- that does not mean that this verse says Christ died for the sheep AND the goats. Lutherans have gone about as far as one can go away from Calvinism and still remain scriptural. But even most of them don't know their own doctrine.
terriergal 2 years ago
If God loved the world "in a sense", maybe Jn 3:16 should read, "For God so loved the world in a sense that he gave..."
nbanuchu 2 years ago
LaneCh, I would like for you to explain how the video can make an ssertion regarding what the "Greek experts" cite when, in looking into the matter, there is no citation as claimed but rather the opposite is asserted? No "Greek expert," cites Jn 3:16, with reference to "kosmos," "to mean believers only". However, they do cit it as referring to the "inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race" (Thayer), wholly contrary to the claim made in the video. How do you explain that?
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Has anyone yet checked out the language resources to see if in fact the claim made on the video (first 37 seconds) is true?
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Yes, it is true. Look up kosmos in the greek lexicon. Besides, look at the MORE SPECIFIC verses about who Jesus died for.
terriergal 2 years ago
Apparently, it is not true. See my earlier reply.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
I just have to laugh. "has anyone yet checked" Umm. Yup nope no one, not a single person has checked. I mean, really!
terriergal 2 years ago
It seems others may have checked it, however, neither carefully or properly. See my earlier reply.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
go to the blueletterbible site and look up john 3:16. Then click the C, which will show you the greek. Then click on the numbered entry for kosmos, which will bring up the 8 definitions.
terriergal 2 years ago
Terriergal, the 8 definitions listed in the BLB are not Thayer's but were made by whoever set up the website. Scroll down to Thayer's lexicon, click on "Rest of the Entry", then scroll further down to point #5. Note how it reads citing Jn3:16. Read the entire entry by Thayer's. He mentions nothing regarding "all believers". You will find the same with Strong, TDNT, and Vine. The language references show the fallacy of the assertion made in the video regarding kosmos.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
CORRECTION: 5th sentence should have read, "He mentions nothing regarding "believers only".
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
FYI, (1) Strong's should not be for academic use; it's usefulness is very limited, at least, this seems to be the scholarly opinion. Strong's provides different meanings of a Greek word, but offers no guidance as to which ought to be used for any particular verse. Therefore, (2) Strong's does NOT "specifically cite Jn 3:16 as an example when 'kosmos' or 'world' is referring to 'believers only'." Apparently, he not only makes a false statement but depends on a non-academic resource for support.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
I have cold feet. Am I cold or nervous?
All words are based on context. "Cold feet" meaning nervous in the context of a wedding does not mean that it means nervous standing without socks or shoes in the snow. Read a dictionary. Many words and phrases have many different meanings depending upon context, nbanchu.
greghod 2 years ago
I agree with respect to words having different meanings. As the lexicons show, "kosmos" has a few meanings and it does depend on context how it is to be interpreted.. However, the Greek experts and the language references cited on the video do not support his argument as he contends; rather they argue against his assertions! He is falsifying information in order to maintain legitimacy to his beliefs.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
If the world means the "only believers" in Jn 3:16, then it must be so for 15:18-19, reading "If the world (only believers) hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world (believers), the world (believers) would love its own; but because you are not of the world (believers), but I chose you out of the world (believers), therefore the world (believers) hates you"? Is this what happens when one "follow[s] basic, universally accepted Biblical hermenuetics"?
nbanuchu 2 years ago
The possibility does exist, of course, that the word translated 'world' might be more dependant on context than you seem to be allowing...
curvalecce 2 years ago
I think the context presented thus far, however brief, adequately demonstrates the problem inherent in defining "world" to mean "believers only" (a definition all lexicons at my disposal do not even suggest for Jn 3:16).
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Try Thayer
κόσμος [S 2889]
8b) of believers only, Jn 1:29; Jn 3:16; Jn 3:17; Jn 6:33; Jn 12:47 1Co 4:9; 2Co 5:19
But how do we harmonize the idea God wants WHOSOEVER to be saved with John 6:65? If God is truly sovereign (Isa 43:13), and He wants every person saved, how can anyone be damned? As Paul asks in Ro 9:19 "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?"
curvalecce 2 years ago
Unfortunately, "8b" was added and is not from Thayer's resource (as one may be misled to believe). However, if you go to the BLB website (where Thayer's entry is in part), go to "Click here for the rest of the entry", and then scroll down to point #5, you will see that Jn 3:16 is cited under a definiton that contradicts what is being asserted in the video. If you check all the other sources used by the BLB, none cite Jn 3:16 as referring to "believers only".
nbanuchu 2 years ago
God is truly sovereign and in his sovereignty he has chosen to grant to men the freedom to choose their own eternal destiny. Not all that God desires comes to pass, cf. Matt 23:37; Ezek 18:32. As such, there is no fault with God.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
My objection is with the video making an erroneous assertion regarding how the "Greek experts" define world in Jn 3:16, I think it would be best if you checked out the claims first, whether it is true or not and let me know what you find
nbanuchu 2 years ago
1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
BT3701 2 years ago
I have checked Strong's and Thayer's and they do not support his argument. I looked up two other language references and they, also, oppose his assertions. For example, Thayer's Lexicon reads, "the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race." He's obviously giving wrong information.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Putting to one side all the overwhelming evidence for the correct reading of John 3:16 as referring to those chosen by God, the reason I cannot accept the Arminian view is that it portrays God as a fumbling loser, who occasionally wins a soul, but spends most of His time watching those His Son died for falling happily into hell.
Scripture presents a God who NEVER fails, and whose love existed before the making of the world, is with us now, and will be forever.
curvalecce 2 years ago
Your idea of God's providence is obviously flawed (as well as, most likely, your understanding of Arminian teaching) and your reading of Jn 3:16, just like the video, is clearly erred. The "teacher" on the video is providing false information that can be easily ascertained by checking the language references he cited and other references he did not cite. Again, let's make note of something here, the Greek experts themselves wholly disagree with his interpretation of Jn 3:16.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
mmh, I had never seen it that way...That's a good point indeed from this point of view. What about this though : 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (2Pet 3:9). Is "anyone" out of context too?
Eyezel7 2 years ago
2Pet 3:8 gives the context of Peter's readers 'αγαπητοι'. All those God loves WILL be saved. He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4) He is God now and forever. No one can snatch you from Him or stand in His way. (isa 43:13) To Him the nations are far less than nothing; God controls the stars in the sky and everyone on this earth. When God does something, we cannot change it or even ask why. (Dan 4:35) There is no fear in love (1Jn 4:18), and God is love (1Jh 4:8)
curvalecce 2 years ago
Eph 1:4. Thise chosen from the foundation of the world, are not particular individuals at the exclusion of others but has reference to the kinds of persons chosen, that is, believers cf. v.12-13: "who first trusted in Christ...ye believed".
nbanuchu 2 years ago
My apologies, but I don't quite understand the point you're trying to make.
nbanuchu 2 years ago
Calvinists can pervert the word of God all they want. But not only John 3:16 speaks the truth, the same truth is spoken in John 3:15, and in countless other verses. Whole Bible refutes Calvinism. People, read your Bible. If you end up in hell it is entirely your own fault. Don't let the Calvinists or Catholics read it for you. Read it yourself. And start with Matthew. Calvinism is Satanic doctrine which has agenda to see you in hell. Don't let them do it to you. Trust JESUS CHRIST. CALL HIS NAME
FrenzyBullet 2 years ago
Comment removed
delitemyheart 2 years ago
So, does the sinner suffer eternal torment for the same exact sins Christ already suffered for? Christ died for those whom God Almighty LOVED,because LOVE is an action not a sentiment. Can God love those whom His love is not effected on? We are commanded to love all even though we may not feel like it,because that is Gods nature. Yet our Love is not effected until we act. God acts on behalf of those He LOVES
bigbadwolff1 2 years ago
Greetings! in the name of the Lord Jesus who is God most High.
"world" in John 3:16 refers to all humanity whom God Almighty loved and gave his only begotten Son on their behalf yet only the elect would be enabled by his grace to believe in the name of the Lord Jesus and be saved. (I both disagree with Mark Keiler and disagree with him. Forgive me if I've misspelled his last name.)
May the God of all grace have mercy, grace, and peace upon you all. in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
MB
Truthknower 2 years ago
This is FALSE DOCTRINE!! CALVINISM is of the DEVIL!!
TiredofHype09 2 years ago
Care to explain why or how?
LaneCh 2 years ago
Ever notice how when you thought you've seen all the quackery there is to see, that this subject uncovers even more absurd forms of it ?
theologymattrz 2 years ago
Comment removed
nbanuchu 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dismissing "Tired's" tirade, LaneCh ought to explain how Keilar can assert that the "Greek experts" state what they, in fact, have not stated.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
AMEN!
Mykingdomtube 1 year ago
What about:K..J.V(Act 2:38)
(Act 17:30) And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
(Joh 1:7) The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
(1Jn 2:2-6) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
TheSearcher24 2 years ago
Well according to my understanding of John 3;16 Jesus make it clear ! Yes it`s true that God love the whole people not just christians , But people should responce toward God`s love for us to accept Jesus and turn from their wicked ways ! When i born , i born as a wordly person with evil mind and ways ! But i reliase where i`m and i accept God`s love for me and i believe in Jesus as my saver and I make Him Lord of my live !
ndoj74 2 years ago
Matthew 27:46:
"Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"- which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
If Jesus was God, then it would be the same as Jesus saying:
"Myself, Myself, why have you forsaken me?"
It doesn't make sense at all. Furthermore, Greek was not the bible's original language, HEBREW was. The bible hasn't remained it it's original language, and many verses have been altered Christians. Why? Because its not the word of God.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
No Jesus was the Son of GOD...So He was crying to His Father..
TiredofHype09 2 years ago
Numbers 23:19:
God is not a man, that he should lie, NOR a son of man, that he should change his mind.
God clearly does not become a man, in the above verse. How can you have a God become a man, and not become a man? It's contradictory for God to become a man, if you agree with Numbers 23:19.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
Malachi 3:6:
"I the LORD do not change."
If God became a man, don't you think this is a change? God is all-knowing, but Jesus was not.
Jesus said:
Mat 24:36:
No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, NOR the Son, but only the Father.
Jesus here clearly admits that not even "he" knows the last hour, but ONLY God does. The triune God cannot "know the last hour" and "not know the last hour", simultaneously.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
Hey if you want to discuss the godhead further PM me because this is nit what this video is about..
TiredofHype09 2 years ago
In john 3:16, the word "begotten" has been thrown out in new testament, by 32 Christian scholars, of the highest eminence, backed by 50 corporate Christian denominations .
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
Futhuremore, John 3:16 contradicts:
Jeremiah 31:9 and also contradicts Exodus 4:22 and also Psalms 2:7. One place says Ephraim is God's firstborn, in another place, it says Jesus was the (only) son sacrificed, in another place says in:
Exodus 4:22, that Israel is God's firstborn.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
Luke 6:12:
And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God.
You can clearly see here, that Jesus had a God, which is why he was praying! He was not God!
If Jesus was God, then it would be the same as saying: "Jesus went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to Jesus."
Also, theres NO unambiguous statement in the complete Bible, where Jesus himself says he's god, or to worship him.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. v14. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
1John 5:7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
crem004 2 years ago
In John 1:1, the 1st time the word God is used, the stronger Greek word is "HO THEOS", which means "Divine God". However, the 2nd time the word God is used, it is a Greek word "TON THEOS" which means "a godly person" is used. (Greek translations)
From the CORRECT Greek manuscripts) reading of John 1:1 is:
"The beginning was the word, the word was with God, and the word was a godly person."
John 1:1, the Bible translators MISTRANSLATED this verse on purpose, and has deceived people.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
1 John 5:7 [KJV]:
There are 3 that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, & Holy Ghost: and these 3 are 1.
This verse has been thrown out by 32 scholars of HIGHEST status, backed by 50 denominations which say:
1 John 5:7 is a fabrication, an interpolation and they have labeled it as: "Human Handiwork."
NOT me, the Christian scholars did that. This is why you won't find this complete verse in the RSV or NIV.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
ndoj74, In John 3:16, 32 Christians of the very highest eminence backed by 50 corporate denominations CONFIRMED that word "begotten" is a fabrication, an interpolation and "human handiwork."
There is not a single unambiguous verse in the whole Bible, where Jesus "HIMESELF" says: I am God or Worship me.
If you still consider Jesus to be God, you also have to agree that God felt hungry, in
Mark 11:12:
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
itcrowdfan92 2 years ago
Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Key words here, "ALL MEN"
1apadilla 2 years ago
Just because you believe something deeply does not mean it is right. I was born and raised in American Fundamentalism. On the topics of salvation and election fundamentalists default to Armenian theology. It is easier to deal with. After college I was challenged by a baptist pastor to learn to think for myself. Now, twelve years later, That journey has lead me to Reformed Theology; which I am studying now. Allow me to encourage all of you to study all points for yourselves.
NWWI73 2 years ago
How about this more specific verse?
1 John 2:2
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
JKMax87 2 years ago
God so loved the believers! are you kidding me?
1apadilla 2 years ago
elect does not equal believer.
LaneCh 2 years ago
Really? ok then I did not understand the video. Please explain. what does it equal?
1apadilla 2 years ago
Elect = will eventually believe or does believe now. It does not mean that they necessarily believe at this moment. There are many elect who do not believe right now. That is why evangelism is necessary. We don't know who the elect are. Only God knows that.
LaneCh 2 years ago
Yes, whosoever God has chosen for Himself msb0000.
yzdd777 2 years ago
If you look at John 3:15 it is interesting.
John 3:16 is just the reideration of 3:15 which really clears up the issue beacuse it does not have the word "Kosmos". It is the word for "all" , "all things" "the sum of all parts."
swimant0 2 years ago
EPH 5: 25 Does not say that when you read it in context. !?!?!?!
How do you get that from this scripture and that context of who it was writen to and what was the conext about!! WOW..
swimant0 2 years ago
I find it funny that the man goes through so much trouble to talk about not pulling sciptures out of context and then does the exact same thing to proove his ponit. Kinda funny and I ronic. :-]
swimant0 2 years ago
The context of John 3 is clear; v 15 'that WHOEVER believes...Why do Calvinists want to make this so difficult? Whosoever will, is the elect; whosoever won't is the non-elect.
msb0000 2 years ago
msb0000: I will use your own words to reply to you (with a minor edit)
"The context of John 3 is clear; v 15 'that whoever BELIEVES...Why do non-Calvinists want to make this so difficult? Whosoever will, is the elect; whosoever won't is the non-elect."
So you see, msb0000, the context IS quite clear. And as the video rightly points out, the word 'kosmos' in this passage is referring to believers only. Whoever BELIEVES.
ironclad452 2 years ago
Some other verses to consider for LaneCh
Prov 11:1
1A false balance is an ABOMINATION to the LORD, but a JUST weight is His delight. (NAS)
Isa 45:21c
21c..there is no God else beside me; a JUST God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. (KJV)
In order for God to be JUST, He necessarialy has to give ALL the ability to FREELY CHOOSE to believe or to reject the gift of grace available to ALL PEOPLE. He would NOT do what He considers an ABOMINATION.
Nucc3 2 years ago
"In order for God to be JUST, He necessarialy has to give ALL the ability to FREELY CHOOSE to believe or to reject the gift of grace available to ALL PEOPLE."
So you believe that people deserve salvation? On what basis do they deserve it?
LaneCh 2 years ago
So you believe that people deserve salvation? On what basis do they deserve it?
No I believe we ALL DESERVE CONDEMNATION because ALL have sinned incl. you and I. A JUST God would give ALL OPPORTUNITY to go watch a baseball game. An UNJUST God would say you can come but to another say you can't.. That would be a contradiction to to God's justness, even a abomination to the very nature of a just God Himself.
Nucc3 2 years ago
So you believe that people deserve an opportunity for salvation? On what basis do they deserve that opportunity?
LaneCh 2 years ago
Yes I do and do so based on the very nature of a just God.
Prov 11:1
1A false balance is an ABOMINATION to the LORD, but a JUST weight is His delight. (NAS)
Isa 45:21c
21c..there is no God else beside me; a JUST God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. (KJV)
Do you accept the Bible teaches that God is a just God? If you do, then for God to not provide the same opportunity for ALL to become believers would be a contradiction to the very nature of a JUST God. Think of it. :)
Nucc3 2 years ago
Nucc3, if you do believe that we all deserve condemnation, then does it not follow that God would be perfectly just in sending us all straight to hell if He chose to do so? How can man at the same time both deserve the opportunity to be saved when he also deserves nothing but condemnation to begin with? Is that not like saying a murderer who deserves prison also deserves the opportunity to not go to prison if he but repents of what he's done?
WarrantedFaith 2 years ago
We are saved by the grace of God ALONE, and not because of any choice or decision which somehow merits a salvation that we do not deserve. Our choice to follow and obey Christ necessarily results from the Spirit's miraculous regeneration of a sinner's heart, which only God can initiate through His sovereignty.
WarrantedFaith 2 years ago
Does it not folow that God would be perfectly just in sending us all straight to hell if He chose to do so?
If yu think that is what a just God is then you wuld see that. Now say you had two sons who went on a murder rampage. Do you think God wuld be just in giving grace to one and sending the other to hell without even an opportunity to the same grace as the other son? Look at the verse again
Prov 11:1
1A false balance is an ABOMINATION to the LORD, but a JUST weight is His delight.
Nucc3 2 years ago
im confused here, so sin is not the only thing that separates ppl from God, its sin+God's will itself?
QwertyBible 2 years ago
No. Sin separates us all from God. God's will saves a few (the elect) from eternal damnation. By choosing not to elect some, he leaves them to their own, showing his wrath and giving them what they deserve by sending them to hell as punishment.
Brutangel22 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I don't agree with this what this man is saying. He never validated anywhere that the word WORLD means just believers at all from context. The whe
John 3:16 "For God so loved the WORLD that he gave his one and only Son, that WHOEVER believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. If he insists on context, then he doesn't even have to go beyond the verse.
The invitation is extended to ALL MANKIND and WHOEVER believes will be saved.
Nucc3 2 years ago
Well, I'm not sure that his goal was to prove here that world means believers in this single video. What he was trying to do is show that just because it says "world", it doesn't necessarily mean that it is every single person who has ever lived and will ever will live. In fact, you haven't validated that the word "world" means that, either. (Also, "whosoever" isn't in the greek.)
LaneCh 2 years ago
Thank you for your response LaneCh.
Looking at the word WORLD which can take in the WHOLE "kosmos", I believe in this particular instance the word WHOSOEVER "pas" in the Greek implies the WHOLE OF PEOPLE meaning everybody,
It's like me saying speaking to EVERYBODY around me saying, I am going to watch a baseball game WHOSOEVER wants to come may watch it with me. Notice I don't exclude anybody. They FREELY choose if they want to come or not. What do you think? :)
Nucc3 2 years ago
"It's like me saying speaking to EVERYBODY around me saying, I am going to watch a baseball game WHOSOEVER wants to come may watch it with me. Notice I don't exclude anybody. They FREELY choose if they want to come or not. What do you think? :)"
Are you not familiar with the Calvinistic position? We affirm that. What we don't believe is that "whosoever" means that "ability". We don't differ on that. We differ on *why* one believes and another doesn't. Why do you believe and not your neighbor?
LaneCh 2 years ago
Also, your greek isn't good. "pas" means "all" in the greek. The literal translation of that phrase is "all the believing ones." Whosoever was put there in english translations simply for aesthetics (ie. "whosoever" looks better than "all the believing ones" in english.)
LaneCh 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The words whoever, whosoever, and all can be interchangeable in the verse as the translations demonstrate without changing the meaning of the word. IOW
John 3:16
16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. (NAS
John 3:16
16"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that WHOEVER believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (NKJ)
All who freely believe
Nucc3 2 years ago
We affirm that.
OK then let's see..You believe that man has a free will to choose if he wants to come and watch a ball game but yet some don't have the ability to come if he wants to? Where then is the free will to choose then? If God so loves the WORLD then ALL have the ability to freely choose do they not? If God doesn't give the ability to ALL then is God a just God?
Nucc3 2 years ago
Actually Peter is warning us against false teachings. Read the Chapter 1 into Chapter 2. God helps us, by the Holy Spirit (Paraclyte) to discern what is truth and what is not if we desire those things.
jazzbummer 3 years ago
Why would God make man from His image then allow sin to destroy when Gods whole purpose and desire is to be with/have fellowship with Man as Jesus said "I chose you". He did not choose a few but for all because Adam and Eve chose to sin as Adam chose to name all the animals in the garden
jazzbummer 3 years ago
Another real problem created by the doctrine of the divine sovereignty has to do with the will of man. If God rules His universe by His sovereign decrees, how is it possible for man to exercise free choice? And if he can not exercise freedom of choice, how can he be held responsible for his conduct? Is he not a mere puppet whose actions are determined by a behind-the-scenes God who pulls the strings as it pleases Him?
- Knowledge of the holy
A.W. Tozer
jazzbummer 3 years ago
We are, by nature, sinners. That means we are totally depraved and can't choose God. We are totally responsible for sin because, although every human to ever live was born a sinner, we still violated the standards of a holy God. WE could never save ourselves by choosing Him. He had to choose us. There is no other way.
Brutangel22 2 years ago
aTH, no it doesn't.:
tinyurl(.)com/3b2263
LaneCh 3 years ago
In the OT, only in Israel are the true worshipers of Jehovah, God looks for true worshipers and not just anybody else. God alone makes a difference for what do we have that we haven't receive. God does all things according to His pleasure and purpose and is not answerable to anyone. He exercises absolute sovereignty to all His creation. If you by faith can't receive such Highness then bow down to your reasoning.
sumintao 3 years ago
Why worship a God who doesn't love all sinners? Are there any sinners who are different from others? Is God a respecter of persons? No, Jesus died for the elect, ACCORDING TO FOREKNOWLEDGE, and since God does know all things, He makes His decisions based on that knowledge, not on His arbitrary pleasure. I am a Christian and am guided by the Holy Spirit, so why do I not believe in Calvinism? Because man has a free will and is able to choose between God and the world, between salvation hell
apologeticsman 3 years ago
Allow me to define two things for you:
will: the principle of volition that controls the inner vehicles
choice: consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action
With that said, please provide us with even one verse in Scripture that even alludes to the fact that man's will (not man's choice) is free.
LaneCh 3 years ago