The Five Points of Calvinism

[jBird]

Not me and not any more. As you can see I take the subject very serious. I spent about 4 hours looking up each passage of scripture and quoting it in context. I'm not willing to do that again.

I'll probably stick around today and then I'm out.

j

 

[reba]

shoot i would enjoy such a debate :nod

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Not me and not any more. As you can see I take the subject very serious.

I too take the subject very seriously.

I spent about 4 hours looking up each passage of scripture and quoting it in context. I'm not willing to do that again.

If you would like we could have a more focused debate, with a 1 post limit each per round. That would be more fair to your time constraints.

We also didn't mean for you to feel like you wasted your time, another venue and what you wrote would have been perfect, it just wasn't suited for the kind of debate had here is all.

I'll probably stick around today and then I'm out.

That's too bad, sorry if you feel disrespected.

 

[Butch5]

Yup. I understand. That's why I ask for a formal debate but that wasn't accepted.

It wan't accepted?

 

[Butch5]

J

Not me and not any more. As you can see I take the subject very serious. I spent about 4 hours looking up each passage of scripture and quoting it in context. I'm not willing to do that again.

I'll probably stick around today and then I'm out.

j

Jbird,

As I said in my opening statement, I'm willing to address any of the passages you posted. However, time and space won't allow for every passage to be elaborated on. If you'd like to take the passages you think best make your point and post them on the debated page I'll gladly address them. As I pointed out in my statement, I think we should deal seriously with the word of God.

 

[Obadiah]

At this point this thread will return to following the A&T guidelines posted below. This is not the one on one debate forum and a thread in the one on one debate forum was already opened for two of you to debate this issue by the rules of that particular forum. I suggest you go to that forum and read the rules posted there. There have been numerous warnings issued about following the guidelines of this (Apologetics and Theology) forum and staff has already requested a return to topic which has been largely ignored. From this point on warnings will be issued with infraction points for any further violations.


"Christian Theology is by definition the study of God through His word, the Bible. Apologetics goes hand in hand with theology as it is the branch of Christian theology which attempts to give a rational defense of the Christian faith. That makes the Apologetics and Theology forum unique from many of our other forums in that this is a place specifically for these types of discussions.

With this in mind, the following guidelines should be followed.

• Original posts should reference specific scripture and what it is the member wants to say or ask about that scripture.
• Subsequent opposing responses should include references to supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation for the contrary understanding.
• Opinions are plenty and have little value so please do not state positions that have no basis in scripture.
• Do not use phrases such as, “You’re wrong.” This is insulting and inappropriate and there are nicer ways to disagree without being insulting.
• Once you have made a point, refrain from flooding the forum with numerous posts making the same point over and over with nothing new to support it.
• You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer.
• Failing to answer someone’s question doesn’t necessarily amount to an admission of error or surrender but keep in mind that in any debate if you refuse to or can not answer a reasonable question, it may weaken your position."

 

[Doulos Iesou]

At this point this thread will return to following the A&T guidelines posted below. This is not the one on one debate forum and a thread in the one on one debate forum was already opened for two of you to debate this issue by the rules of that particular forum. I suggest you go to that forum and read the rules posted there. There have been numerous warnings issued about following the guidelines of this (Apologetics and Theology) forum and staff has already requested a return to topic which has been largely ignored. From this point on warnings will be issued with infraction points for any further violations.


"Christian Theology is by definition the study of God through His word, the Bible. Apologetics goes hand in hand with theology as it is the branch of Christian theology which attempts to give a rational defense of the Christian faith. That makes the Apologetics and Theology forum unique from many of our other forums in that this is a place specifically for these types of discussions.

With this in mind, the following guidelines should be followed.

• Original posts should reference specific scripture and what it is the member wants to say or ask about that scripture.
• Subsequent opposing responses should include references to supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation for the contrary understanding.
• Opinions are plenty and have little value so please do not state positions that have no basis in scripture.
• Do not use phrases such as, “You’re wrong.” This is insulting and inappropriate and there are nicer ways to disagree without being insulting.
• Once you have made a point, refrain from flooding the forum with numerous posts making the same point over and over with nothing new to support it.
• You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer.
• Failing to answer someone’s question doesn’t necessarily amount to an admission of error or surrender but keep in mind that in any debate if you refuse to or can not answer a reasonable question, it may weaken your position."

Understood, I have address jbird privately on this matter.

Thank you!

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I see your point and don't necessarily disagree. However, I'm addressing the quantitative meaning of Eternal Life (v3) as well as the qualitative meaning.

I think that is besides the point, and we could perhaps start a new thread about the qualitative meaning vs quantitative meaning of "eternal life," however my contention is that to infer OSAS in this word simply does not fit.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." John 5:24 (ESV)

The word "believes," is actually in the present participle which denotes a continuous and ongoing action, not just a one time belief. It is not contained within this passage or other ones like it in the Gospel of John regarding those who later become unbelievers, or whether that is even possible. Those who presently believe have eternal life, and those who presently believe can never lose it, that is clear.

Here I agree that unity is A purpose of His prayer but disagree that it's about "believers in general". Like you, I think unity is key (primary even) reason for His prayer, but not the only reason. He's talking about unity through completing/perfecting all the people that The Father gave to Him, in my opinion. [Yes, I understand that the phrase “all The Father gave Him” is applied to the ‘close disciples”. I agreed with your original point there, before you even made it.
But my point is in addtion to that point. The reason He prayed for the ‘close disciples’ then transitions to praying for others in like manner in the same prayer is very much for unity and “completeness”. Qualitatively AND quantitatively.
He even demonstrates that He's praying for specifically (not generally) only those that are given to Him by The Father through His exclusion of Judas as one of the 12.

I disagree with your exegesis on the grounds that it misses a word from the text and thus completely misreads it, I will show you.

The Greek is "τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν," or to translate it, "completed in one." The word "completed" or "perfected," modifies the word "one," so it is not that they will be unified through perfecting, but rather that the completeness will be through unity. I see it that you assessment is a bit backwards on this matter. To take the word "completeness" out of the context of "completed in one," is to misread the text and read in OSAS doctrine.

Here I also agree yet disagree. His prayer is a prayer for people that will (future) believe thru the words of the 'close disciples', not just for the existing believers. When Jesus prayed v20-23, how many believing people do you think existed that day that did so thru hearing the words of the 'close disciples'? I think none at that time. Thus the prayer for others. But yes, I am aware of the present tense verb form for believe used in His prayer. See why, below.

I'm saying that the people he is praying for are already believers, regardless of the time they became believers. He isn't praying for unbelievers, but believers throughout all generations, that's my point.

I'm a little taken aback by smart people that think Eternal Life is not eternal. I've never found one glimpse or any justification for that idea, myself. It seems contrary to common sense and Scripture. But some people are, I suppose, comfortable thinking Eternal Life is not eternal. I simply disagree with them based on common sense and Scriptures.

Do I think eternal life goes on forever? Yes. Do I think the quantitative meaning of "eternal," is the primary thrust in the phrase "eternal life?" No. I believe this because I have examined the usage of the phrase, and therefore come to the conclusion that it basically means, life that comes from God and is with God. Hence in John 17:3 we see nothing about the quantity of time, but merely bespeaks the quality of eternal life, in that it is knowing God the Father and Jesus Christ.

I believe another member has already expressed their opinion that Jesus’ prayer might not have been or will be answered. I disagree. I think ALL Jesus’ prayers are answered and He never prayed for things that were not in accord with the will of The Father. (Heb 10:7)

Would you say that all believers are unified? If so, please demonstrate. If not, how then does this jive with your understanding of Jesus' prayer?

Me either. That IS my hypothetical point. I couldn’t have said it better myself. I recognize that’s NOT what the verse says directly, however. I believe that it’s the clear implication though. And as you say, “have no problem with such a verse”. I’m merely pointing out that if you take v3 and v23 as a coherent whole, what you say above comes very, very close to such a ‘verse’.

v3 is after Jesus says that he has given eternal life to all those who have been given to him, namely the disciples. While, eternal life is not mentioned in v23 and it is in regards to bringing more people of the world to faith via the revealed love of God in the unity of the church.

If a person believes, surely they will receive eternal life as is stated elsewhere. No where does it infer that a person will believe, nor would it be consequential to say that people who believe in the future will receive eternal life.

I will admit that I infer Eternal Life is eternal.

As I said, this would be an interesting conversation to have, but I don't think aionios is so semantically limited to always infer an infinite amount of time.

"I pray to you Father that you would grant those who believe through their word eternal life (see v3, for a definition of Eternal Life),"

You just took what I said, and even said, "I recognize that’s NOT what the verse says directly, however. I believe that it’s the clear implication though."

Please summarize what you think it says, without highlighting an implication.

I’m confused:

He is praying for people who in the future are already believers, and thus have eternal life. Therefore, why would he pray that people who are believers should get it?

When you said earlier, about v 23, “more and more people in the world”, do you not think that future believers are not being prayed for?

Some of them are, it doesn't denote a particular group among them, but rather the "world," in general. It also doesn't denote that this will take place, but rather it is an expressed desire on the part of Jesus and the Father. Some of the world will believe, many will not, those who believe will have eternal life, those who don't will not. Nothing particular to OSAS position with those statements.

I don’t see that verse 3 says that, no. In fact, I think that the main thrust of Eternal Life is that it’s eternal. It includes fellowship and union with God and Jesus Christ (Christ being Messiah, i.e. God sent Him) sure. But to call fellowship the main thrust of Eternal Life is like calling the heart the main thrust of life, to the neglect of the lungs (breath).

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV)

I don't know how you can say that fellowship and union with God and Jesus Christ aren't the main thrust of eternal life, when it says that is precisely what eternal life is. The word is frankly more complicated then what you are showing, as Scripture even says:

"And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life." 1 John 5:20 (ESV)

That God is eternal life, and that this life is "in his son," (1 John 5:11) this paints a very different picture of eternal life than simply a quantitative meaning.

It’s not irrelevant to me. It is my position that Jesus never prayed for anything outside of God’s will. If Jesus prayed for the Eternal Life of all believers (just as He did for the Eternal Life of the ‘close disciples’, which you admitted He did) then I think it’s God’s will that they also receive Eternal Life (on Earth and in Heaven).

I will say that I think that all believers receive eternal life, not only in this age but the one to come. However, that is in regards to people who maintain being a believer, as is noted in John 5:24, and all texts like it, the word "believes," is actually present participle which is an ongoing action.

In order to assert OSAS you have to argue that a person who is a believer cannot stop being a believer.

Okay. Me too. I also think it’s about 3) Eternal Life for not just the ‘close disciples’ (a stipulation you already agreed to) but for Eternal Life for all believers. A complete and perfect # of them. All in unity with each other and in Jesus and The Father. Umm, that’s what He prayed for in v23.

No where did I contest that eternal life isn't for all believers, that's a given.

 

[JLB]

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." John 5:24 (ESV)

Key Word Here: Believes - Strong's Number: 4100 - Pisteuo

to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith

1. to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
   1. of the thing believed
      1. to credit, have confidence
   2. in a moral or religious reference
      1. used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
      2. to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith
2. to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
   1. to be intrusted with a thing

King James Word Usage - Total: 248
believe 239, commit unto 4, commit to (one's) trust 1, be committed unto 1, be put in trust with 1, be commit to one's trust 1, believer 1

NAS Word Usage - Total: 243
believe 118, believed 73, believers 3, believes 29, believing 10, do 1, entrust 1, entrusted 6, entrusting 1, has faith 1

• This word carries the weight of this scripture and must be understood in it's fullness to realize what is being said by the Lord here.

• A shallow observation will not yield the fullness of truth that is being expressed by The Lord Jesus Christ.

As Jude says -

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. Jude 1:5

The children of Israel believed and obeyed the command of the Passover, which led them out of Egypt.

The point that Jude is making is they stopped believing or didn't continue to believe, which resulted in them being destroyed by God Himself.

I don't find where the promise of eternal life is promised to unbelievers.


JLB

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Key Word Here: Believes - Strong's Number: 4100 - Pisteuo

to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith

1. to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
   1. of the thing believed
      1. to credit, have confidence
   2. in a moral or religious reference
      1. used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
      2. to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith
2. to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
   1. to be intrusted with a thing

King James Word Usage - Total: 248
believe 239, commit unto 4, commit to (one's) trust 1, be committed unto 1, be put in trust with 1, be commit to one's trust 1, believer 1

NAS Word Usage - Total: 243
believe 118, believed 73, believers 3, believes 29, believing 10, do 1, entrust 1, entrusted 6, entrusting 1, has faith 1

• This word carries the weight of this scripture and must be understood in it's fullness to realize what is being said by the Lord here.

• A shallow observation will not yield the fullness of truth that is being expressed by The Lord Jesus Christ.

As Jude says -

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. Jude 1:5

The children of Israel believed and obeyed the command of the Passover, which led them out of Egypt.

The point that Jude is making is they stopped believing or didn't continue to believe, which resulted in them being destroyed by God Himself.

I don't find where the promise of eternal life is promised to unbelievers.


JLB

Precisely, good post!

 

[Chopper]

jBird. Bravo, Bravo. Other than Calvin's "Institues of the Christian Religion" and other books of various authors defending Calvins doctrines, you have presented the finest, easy to understand thesis on Calvinism.

I have been a student and believer in Calvin's doctrine for years. So I applaud your fine work of research and display of Calvins heart to reach folk who were caught up in doctrinal error. Thank you so very much.

I would like your permission to copy your thesis as I continue to defend the brilliant theology of John Calvin.

 

[chessman]

The word "believes," is actually in the present participle which denotes a continuous and ongoing action, not just a one time belief.

Cool. Good thing Jesus Truly, Truly prayed for it then. And not just for the ‘close disciples’ but for all believers in all generations.

He isn't praying for unbelievers, but believers throughout all generations, that's my point.

Excellent point. I agree.

I think that [quantitative meaning of Eternal Life in v3] is besides the point, and we could perhaps start a new thread about the qualitative meaning vs quantitative meaning of "eternal life…

If it’s beside the point, then why would we start a new thread about the qualitative vs quantitative meaning of “eternal life”? Plus, you’re really just proving my point. You think its quantitative meaning is ‘beside the point’. When, in fact, v3 gives us the very definition of Eternal Life. How could its quantitative meaning be beside the point?

remember we're not talking about what must be believed to have eternal life, but the qualitative meaning that is eternal life

I remember that's not what you are talking about, but it's precisely what I'm talking about.

If an archeologist found a partial fragment of John’s Gospel that read;

“Now this is eternal life: that they know _[unreadable text-A]_and _[unreadable text-B]_”​

boy I sure would want to know what the unreadable texts in BOTH blanks said. It’s obviously not quantitatively ‘beside the point’ in any discussion of what Eternal Life is. What goes in the blanks is quantitatively important. You're not going to convience me otherwise, no matter how many times and in what way you say that it isn't important.
Knowing these two 'unreadable texts' are quantitatively important to having Eternal Life.

To demonstrate the following exercise might be helpful.
Let’s assume for a moment that someone (let’s call him Saul) had never heard of Jesus before but Saul knew God his whole life. Saul hasn’t quantitatively met both the criteria for receiving Eternal Life IAW John 17:3. Saul knows The Father, the only true God (unreadable Text-A), quite well. In fact Saul has been studying Him and dedicating his whole life to knowing/worshiping Him (The Father).
But then one day, walking along a country road, Saul is visited by a guy named Jesus. Jesus explains to Saul how he’s actually The Christ (The Messiah that Saul’s read about his whole life). Saul believes him, after some strong persuasion, and thus Saul ‘comes to knowJesus is the Christ, whom The Father sent (unreadable text-B.
Then and only then, does Saul know both blanks within the John 17:3 criteria for receiving Eternal Life.

The Greek is "τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν," or to translate it, "completed in one." The word "completed" or "perfected," modifies the word "one," so it is not that they will be unified through perfecting, but rather that the completeness will be through unity.

Are you arguing for or against OSAS here? ‘Perfection/Completeness through unity’. I like that. Would Christ’s perfect/compete unified Church be perfect or compete without Paul? I say no way. I don’t disagree with your point, however. I'm just not sure why you even mention it.

I'm saying that the people he is praying for are already believers, regardless of the time they became believers.

That would be another demonstration of your pre-conceived ideas imposed upon the prayer contained in v20-23. If they were already believers that He was praying for, then why make a prayer asking for them to all be one?

John 17:20 (LEB) “And I do not ask on behalf of these only, but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they all may be one,..​

Remember, you already stipulated that verse 20-23 is about other believers.

Do I think the quantitative meaning of "eternal," is the primary thrust in the phrase "eternal life?" No.

Me either. I agree with you here. I never tried to quantify the word “eternal”. I was talking about the quantitative meaning of the whole verse 23, not the word "eternal". Least not change the subject.

I made the point that there are at least a quantity of three elements (I’d actually argue more than three elements via the over 500 usages of “Christ” and the implication of the Holy Spirit) to verse 3’s definition of Eternal Life. I stand by that observation still, after all you've said.

I have examined the usage of the phrase, and therefore come to the conclusion that it basically means, life that comes from God and is with God

I have examined the usages of aiōnios too and I agree with you so far.
http://biblehub.com/greek/aio_nios_166.htm

we see nothing about the quantity of time, but merely bespeaks the quality of eternal life, in that it is knowing God the Father and Jesus Christ.

Here I disagree with you. I most definitely see ‘life that comes from God and with God” as having no other possibility than a life that lasts forever in time. Just as God lasts forever, His life that He gives believers lasts forever.

I don't think aionios is so semantically limited to always infer an infinite amount of time.

Okay. But do you think God’s been around forever in the past and will be around in the infinite future? If not, then why not. If yes, then it’s not much of an inference to also think Aionios Life (God’s Life, Eternal Life, whatever you want to call it) is also going to be an infinite future life. Anyway, that would be one heck of a way to argue against OSAS as both OSAS and anti-OSAS think believers will live forever.

Would you say that all believers are unified? If so, please demonstrate. If not, how then does this jive with your understanding of Jesus' prayer?

Of course not all believers are unified (completely/perfectly one) in the sense that Jesus meant it there. Thus the reason for Jesus’ prayer for it to occur. It jives on its plain/common sense merits. I’m not sure what you are asking me to clarify. What had occurred within the ‘close disciples’ for example (so far, as He picks back up praying for the disciples to once again be with Him and the Father in v24), Jesus prayed for that also to occur for all believers. I honestly don't see your anti-OSAS point.

 

[chessman]

v3 is after Jesus says that he has given eternal life to all those who have been given to him, namely the disciples.

Yes. I know. We’ve already agreed to this point several times.

While, eternal life is not mentioned in v23 and it is in regards to bringing more people of the world to faith …

I know the exact phrase “eternal lfie” isn’t mentioned in v23. But guess what is mentioned? Both quantitative elements (what goes in the blanks of the discovered fragment from above) is in v23.
Plus, what do you mean by “v23 is in regards to bringing more people of the world to faith”. Why not just call it what it is? Jesus prayed to bring more people of the world to faith in v23 (as even you are admitting here). v23 is not “in regards to” more people, it’s a prayer for more people. It's a prayer for more people to receive Eternal Life (obviously).

If a person believes, surely they will receive eternal life as is stated elsewhere. … nor would it be consequential to say that people who believe in the future will receive eternal life.

Huh? If a person believes, surely they will receive eternal life. I agree.
But then you turn right around and say it’s not consequential that people who believe will receive eternal life. Weird and frankly, two quite contradictory statements.

Please summarize what you think it says, without highlighting an implication.

I think v23 is Jesus praying to The Father that The Father would grant to those who believe through the close disciples' word Eternal Life.

He is praying for people who in the future are already believers,….

Huh? People who in the future are already believers? That’s weird also. I think my summary is much more understandable. But then again, that’s why it’s my summary. I understand it better than yours and mine fits the text more directly.

It also doesn't denote that this will take place, but rather it is an expressed desire on the part of Jesus and the Father.

Okay, that’s your opinion. I have a higher opinion of Jesus' and The Father's desires, evidently, than to think it doesn't denote something that will in fact take place. That would be for another thread, however.

Some of the world will believe, many will not, those who believe will have eternal life, those who don't will not. Nothing particular to OSAS position with those statements.

Again, okay if that’s your opinion on these two statements. I think there is something particular there.

In order to assert OSAS you have to argue that a person who is a believer cannot stop being a believer.

My point was/is specifically that Jesus prayed for the quantitative meaning of Eternal Life in v23 for future people (not just the 'close disciples'). If you think that asserts OSAS principles, that's on you. I would agree, however.
In order to assert anti-OSAS you have to argue that Eternal Life is not eternal (as you seem to above) and that Jesus’ prayer in v23 is merely His desire for the future (as you seem to above).
All you’ve done, really, is confirm that you don’t think Eternal Life is eternal nor do you think Jesus’ prayer in v23 is more than an "expressed desire" on His part. That is that the creator and the sustainer of the universe has merely 'expressed desire' in v23.

 

[chessman]

Key Word Here: Believes - Strong's Number: 4100 - Pisteuo
King James Word Usage - Total: 248
JLB

Wow, that’s a lot usages of the word “believes”. I’ll see your 248 usages of the word Pisteuo and raise you 538 NT-Greek usages of the word “Christ”. And that doesn’t even include the OT-Hebrew usages and all the typological usages. Must be important to know what Christ means, huh? I’d say it’s actually vital to Eternal Life, to know what Christ means. It’s not His last name.
John 17:3 (LEB) Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

• This word carries the weight of this scripture and must be understood in it's fullness to realize what is being said by the Lord here.

• A shallow observation will not yield the fullness of truth that is being expressed by The Lord Jesus Christ.

• I agree. Just as the Greek word “Christ” carries the weight of Scripture and must be understood in it’s fullness as well. A shallow observation of John 17:3’s “Christ” yields a falsehood of belief in what Eternal Life is.

For example:

The children of Israel believed and obeyed the command of the Passover, which led them out of Egypt.
The point that Jude is making is they stopped believing or didn't continue to believe, which resulted in them being destroyed by God Himself.

Good thing believing and obeying the command of the Passover, isn’t Eternal Life, per John 17:3

If they'd only known "the only true God, and Jesus Christ"

 

[Deborah13]

Key Word Here: Believes - Strong's Number: 4100 - Pisteuo

to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith

1. to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
   1. of the thing believed
      1. to credit, have confidence
   2. in a moral or religious reference
      1. used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
      2. to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith
2. to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
   1. to be intrusted with a thing

King James Word Usage - Total: 248
believe 239, commit unto 4, commit to (one's) trust 1, be committed unto 1, be put in trust with 1, be commit to one's trust 1, believer 1

NAS Word Usage - Total: 243
believe 118, believed 73, believers 3, believes 29, believing 10, do 1, entrust 1, entrusted 6, entrusting 1, has faith 1

• This word carries the weight of this scripture and must be understood in it's fullness to realize what is being said by the Lord here.

• A shallow observation will not yield the fullness of truth that is being expressed by The Lord Jesus Christ.

As Jude says -

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. Jude 1:5

The children of Israel believed and obeyed the command of the Passover, which led them out of Egypt.

The point that Jude is making is they stopped believing or didn't continue to believe, which resulted in them being destroyed by God Himself.

I don't find where the promise of eternal life is promised to unbelievers.


JLB

Calvinist doctrine says God's grace is irresistible and that if one is saved they Will perservere. They will not ever not believe. Therefore, they will never again be unbelievers.

 

[FreeGrace]

I think that is besides the point, and we could perhaps start a new thread about the qualitative meaning vs quantitative meaning of "eternal life," however my contention is that to infer OSAS in this word simply does not fit.

Why does it "not fit"?? What does "eternal" mean, except something (life, in this case) that goes on and on. That's what eternal means. Or do you have some other definition for 'eternal'? The point is that God gives this eternal life to those who have believed. And that life is eternal. Eternal life cannot die. That's the point. If eternal life can die, then we shouldn't call it eternal life.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." John 5:24 (ESV)

The word "believes," is actually in the present participle which denotes a continuous and ongoing action, not just a one time belief.

This is a straw man, as always. Just because you find one or a few verses where "believe" is in the present tense is of no consequence because there are verses where "believe" is in the aorist tense.

It is not contained within this passage or other ones like it in the Gospel of John regarding those who later become unbelievers, or whether that is even possible.

Another straw man. How about the gospel of Luke? In 8:12 Jesus used the aorist tense of "believe and be saved". The aorist tense ignores duration. Like a snapshot rather than a movie, which would represent the present tense.

Then, Jesus actually used the present tense for "believe" in v.13 when He said "who believe for a while, and then in time of testing, fall away". So this refutes your view that the present tense demands on-going action.

Further, Paul used the aorist tense in his answer to the jailer in Acts 16:31. So the Bible does not demand that salvation requires ongoing faith, as your view claims.

Those who presently believe have eternal life, and those who presently believe can never lose it, that is clear.

What is equally as clear is that those who have believed in the aorist tense (point in time) also have eternal life.

What your view has not, because it cannot, is show any verse that says that those who only "believe for a while" as Jesus noted in Luke 8:13 lose their eternal life. That's the huge problem with your view. It makes a claim that cannot be found in Scripture.

Do I think eternal life goes on forever? Yes. Do I think the quantitative meaning of "eternal," is the primary thrust in the phrase "eternal life?" No. I believe this because I have examined the usage of the phrase, and therefore come to the conclusion that it basically means, life that comes from God and is with God.

Well, since God IS eternal, I think your examination was rather incomplete. The gift of God that is irrevocable (Rom 11:29) is His own life. God IS eternal life, and He gives His life, which is eternal, to those who have believed (aorist tense).

I will say that I think that all believers receive eternal life, not only in this age but the one to come.

Can you quote any verse that says that those who only "believe for a while" will lose eternal life? If not, why do you continue to believe that view?

However, that is in regards to people who maintain being a believer, as is noted in John 5:24, and all texts like it, the word "believes," is actually present participle which is an ongoing action.

Please don't ignore all the verses where 'believe' is in the aorist tense, which negates your view. And don't forget that Jesus Himself used the present tense of 'believe' and added "for a while" to denote that even the present tense may not be on-going.

In order to assert OSAS you have to argue that a person who is a believer cannot stop being a believer.

Absolutely not. The burden of proof is on your view to demonstrate from Scripture that those who have been given eternal life can lose it. Your view is based on the flawed idea that if one believes for a while, then they are only saved for a while, which isn't anything close to what Luke 8:13 says.

No where did I contest that eternal life isn't for all believers, that's a given.

The given is that all who have been given eternal life, even those who only "believe for a while" still have it.

Why? Because eternal life is ETERNAL. It is God's life. God's life never ends. Either does eternal life.

And, God's gifts are irrevocable, which includes eternal life. Irrefutable.

 

[FreeGrace]

Key Word Here: Believes - Strong's Number: 4100 - Pisteuo

to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith

1. to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in
   1. of the thing believed
      1. to credit, have confidence
   2. in a moral or religious reference
      1. used in the NT of the conviction and trust to which a man is impelled by a certain inner and higher prerogative and law of soul
      2. to trust in Jesus or God as able to aid either in obtaining or in doing something: saving faith 1bc) mere acknowledgment of some fact or event: intellectual faith
2. to entrust a thing to one, i.e. his fidelity
   1. to be intrusted with a thing

Keep in mind that the act of believing doesn't help God in saving those who believe. The saving is completely on God's part. Man has nothing to do with his salvation, any more than a drowning man helps the life guard who drags his sorry and soggy rear out of the water.

The point is that God saves those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21 says so clearly. In fact, the verse says that God is pleased to do so.

As Jude says -

But I want to remind you, though you once knew this, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. Jude 1:5

The children of Israel believed and obeyed the command of the Passover, which led them out of Egypt.

The point that Jude is making is they stopped believing or didn't continue to believe, which resulted in them being destroyed by God Himself.

Do you believe that Moses is now in heaven, or in hell, awaiting the lake of fire?

I don't find where the promise of eternal life is promised to unbelievers.JLB

I don't find ANY verse that says that eternal life is revocable. But, just the opposite; that God's gifts are irrevocable, of which eternal life is one of them.

The problem that you've continued to ignore is that the Bible never speaks of "unbelievers" as former believers. Seems you keep missing that. Or ignoring that. Jesus described some who only "believe for a while", while using the present tense, so your view that one must continue to believe in order to continue to be saved is fallacious.

And, Jesus used the aorist tense in the previous verse; "lest they believe (aorist) and be saved". So Jesus Himself noted that those who believe in a point in time (aorist) are saved. No sense of continuous action.

 

[FreeGrace]

Wow, that’s a lot usages of the word “believes”. I’ll see your 248 usages of the word Pisteuo and raise you 538 NT-Greek usages of the word “Christ”.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

If it’s beside the point, then why would we start a new thread about the qualitative vs quantitative meaning of “eternal life”? Plus, you’re really just proving my point. You think its quantitative meaning is ‘beside the point’. When, in fact, v3 gives us the very definition of Eternal Life. How could its quantitative meaning be beside the point?

It seems that you and I are using the word "quantitative" differently, in that I am using it in regards to aionios' temporal elements, i.e. duration of time. When from what I can gather you are using it in regards to the different parts of the definition of aionios? Please clarify what you mean by quantitative vs qualitative.

To demonstrate the following exercise might be helpful.
Let’s assume for a moment that someone (let’s call him Saul) had never heard of Jesus before but Saul knew God his whole life. Saul hasn’t quantitatively met both the criteria for receiving Eternal Life IAW John 17:3. Saul knows The Father, the only true God (unreadable Text-A), quite well. In fact Saul has been studying Him and dedicating his whole life to knowing/worshiping Him (The Father).
But then one day, walking along a country road, Saul is visited by a guy named Jesus. Jesus explains to Saul how he’s actually The Christ (The Messiah that Saul’s read about his whole life). Saul believes him, after some strong persuasion, and thus Saul ‘comes to knowJesus is the Christ, whom The Father sent (unreadable text-B.
Then and only then, does Saul know both blanks within the John 17:3 criteria for receiving Eternal Life.

John 17:3 isn't criteria for receiving eternal life, it is the description of eternal life. Eternal life is received through believing the gospel message, and again we have our issues about what we mean by quantitative meaning.

That would be another demonstration of your pre-conceived ideas imposed upon the prayer contained in v20-23. If they were already believers that He was praying for, then why make a prayer asking for them to all be one?
John 17:20 (LEB) “And I do not ask on behalf of these only, but also on behalf of those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they all may be one,..
Remember, you already stipulated that verse 20-23 is about other believers.

I'm not sure what your point is, are you saying that it doesn't make sense for Jesus to pray for unity among people who are believers?

Me either. I agree with you here. I never tried to quantify the word “eternal”. I was talking about the quantitative meaning of the whole verse 23, not the word "eternal". Least not change the subject.

I made the point that there are at least a quantity of three elements (I’d actually argue more than three elements via the over 500 usages of “Christ” and the implication of the Holy Spirit) to verse 3’s definition of Eternal Life. I stand by that observation still, after all you've said.

Here is another example of where we have been talking past each other on the basis of our usage of the word quantitative, which you are using in regards to the quantity of elements, and I am using to expressing the temporal element to aionios.

Here I disagree with you. I most definitely see ‘life that comes from God and with God” as having no other possibility than a life that lasts forever in time. Just as God lasts forever, His life that He gives believers lasts forever.

The Greek word for immortality better describes the idea of life unending, but eternal life is something different and it refers to the life of the next age, and for the believer there is a present experience of the future age through the Holy Spirit, which brings us into communion with God.

What hasn't been addressed by you is what happens if that person then loses their faith, do they still then have eternal life?

Okay. But do you think God’s been around forever in the past and will be around in the infinite future? If not, then why not. If yes, then it’s not much of an inference to also think Aionios Life (God’s Life, Eternal Life, whatever you want to call it) is also going to be an infinite future life. Anyway, that would be one heck of a way to argue against OSAS as both OSAS and anti-OSAS think believers will live forever.

I am simply nothing that the experience of this "life," is contingent on having faith in Christ and being united with him. If a person loses faith, then they do not have it, thus looking to establish OSAS on the basis of the phrase "eternal life," does not hold.

 

[Deborah13]

shoot i would enjoy such a debate :nod

Me, too.

I would like to see each individual doctrine of TULIP and Calvin's doctrine discussed in an organized way.