And yet you had no hesitation to play a what if game with me in which you suggested that I would be willing to put to death all those on the forum who disagree with me! And no hesitation to attack Calvin, even though you now admit you know nothing about him.Greetings again Arial,
No, I do not want to play that game as my particular fellowship does not partake in politics. If we could trace all that have been of the same doctrines throughout the persecuting periods of the Catholic and Protestant Churches, then we would be among the persecuted minority and we do not take up arms to defend ourselves. For example I have had much sympathy for some elements of the early Anabaptists who were persecuted by both the Catholics and Protestants.
Actually I have been to some extent awed by the volume of his writing and influence, but to be honest I have not read or studied any of his works. There seems to be a division between Calvinism and Arminianism (I had to check the spelling by using another forum that has 957 different threads on this dispute - the spell checker accepted Calvinism but did not recognise Arminianism). I have simply not studied Calvinism because of the concept that certain elect are specially selected, and that the rest will burn in hell for eternity. I also reject the Trinity.
The only time that I have heard some advocacy of predestination was when my third cousin in my meeting started to talk about some such concepts. His father in law who is our most senior and thorough going expositor could not persuade him, and my cousin had also a senior friend, one of our well known expositors, in another meeting who apparently could make no progress. I am the librarian for my meeting and I did a search in our literature, and found two items, and gave my cousin a copy of the second. Some months later the expositor from the other meeting thanked me for overcoming the problem, and he was unaware that I had only given a one page summary of the subject to my cousin. I am not sure how much the article helps but I will add it as a separate post.
Kind regards
Trevor
I utterly abhor the persecution of the faithful throughout the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church refer Daniel 7:25, and part of this was carried over by some of the Protestants that gained power after the Reformation. To say it was only part of the times and the Law that stated that heretics should be killed is horrendous.And yet you had no hesitation to play a what if game with me in which you suggested that I would be willing to put to death all those on the forum who disagree with me!
I have mentioned a few items, including the Trinity, which has resulted in my not pursuing Calvinism. I do not want to discuss the article and your answer, partly as it is off topic in this thread. I often participate in the other forum that I mentioned, but in my 18 active years on that forum I have never participated in the Arminianism-Calvinism sub forum which in the new 2 y.o. edition now has 957 threads.And no hesitation to attack Calvin, even though you now admit you know nothing about him.
It is a sad thing to discover how many will never admit they have done something wrong. The lengths they will go to in order to avoid it. A simple sorry, I shouldn't have said that should not be so hard to say. I can only hope that it is simple embarrassment that keeps you slipping right by your culpability and that in your heart you have recognized it and taken it before God in repentance. That is the important thing.Greetings again Arial,
I utterly abhor the persecution of the faithful throughout the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church refer Daniel 7:25, and part of this was carried over by some of the Protestants that gained power after the Reformation. To say it was only part of the times and the Law that stated that heretics should be killed is horrendous.
I have mentioned a few items, including the Trinity, which has resulted in my not pursuing Calvinism. I do not want to discuss the article and your answer, partly as it is off topic in this thread. I often participate in the other forum that I mentioned, but in my 18 active years on that forum I have never participated in the Arminianism-Calvinism sub forum which in the new 2 y.o. edition now has 957 threads.
Kind regards
Trevor
More relevant to this thread, I was interested to find how the Geneva Bible translated Exodus 3:14, by comparison to Tyndale who was persecuted and killed by the Catholics, Church of England and some of the Protestants.As to this post of yours, it is horrendous, but it is still a fact that heretics were put to death by church and state according to their law. Calvin abided by the law, he did not make it. It was normal in their day, not an anomaly.
What is the difference in meaning between I Am that I Am and I will be what I will be? How does one say something different about God than the other? No difference. But I am not interested in this subject.Greetings again Arial,
More relevant to this thread, I was interested to find how the Geneva Bible translated Exodus 3:14, by comparison to Tyndale who was persecuted and killed by the Catholics, Church of England and some of the Protestants.
Exodus 3:14 (Geneva Bible): And God answered Moses, I AM THAT I AM. Also he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Exodus 3:14-15 (KJV): 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. 15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
Exodus 3:12-14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.
Kind regards
Trevor
But He is just a man to you.Greetings Bladerunner,
I believe that Jesus is the Son of God.
Kind regards
Trevor
I have expounded what I consider the meaning in my thread "The Yahweh Name". I accept that Trinitarians are not interested in the Bible teaching of this subject, and especially do not like the future tense of Exodus 3:14 as they insist on incorrectly linking the present tense with John 8:58. I looked up Exodus 3:14 in the Geneva Bible out of interest, and assume that it resulted from strong Trinitarian influence and the same translation is carried over into the KJV, despite Tyndale's correct translation. It is interesting that some on the translation panel of the RV and RSV preferred "I will be", including AB Davidson who was on the panel, but seem to have been overridden by the possibly conservative Trinitarian majority, and thus this future tense only appears in the margin. I understand that a correct understanding of the Yahweh Name is the key to unlocking this subject.What is the difference in meaning between I Am that I Am and I will be what I will be? How does one say something different about God than the other? No difference. But I am not interested in this subject.
As stated I believe he is the Son of God, the Son of Man, a man now exalted, sitting at the right hand of God in God the Father's Throne Psalm 110:1, Revelation 3:21-22.But He is just a man to you.
either He was GOD and He knew it or He was GOD and H did not know it....You don't ever classify Him as a man.Greetings again Bladerunner,
As stated I believe he is the Son of God, the Son of Man, a man now exalted, sitting at the right hand of God in God the Father's Throne Psalm 110:1, Revelation 3:21-22.
Kind regards
Trevor
Monophysite heretic! There is a heresy for every doctrine of the trinity.either He was GOD and He knew it or He was GOD and H did not know it....You don't ever classify Him as a man.
Blade
Jesus classified himself as a man (John 8:40). Peter classified Jesus as a man (Acts 2:22). Paul classified Jesus as a man (Rom 5:15; 1 Tim 2:5).either He was GOD and He knew it or He was GOD and H did not know it....You don't ever classify Him as a man.
Blade
One of the favorite fallacious tactics of heretics in order to ignore clear teaching of the Bible.Greetings again Arial,
I have expounded what I consider the meaning in my thread "The Yahweh Name". I accept that Trinitarians are not interested in the Bible teaching of this subject, and especially do not like the future tense of Exodus 3:14 as they insist on incorrectly linking the present tense with John 8:58. I looked up Exodus 3:14 in the Geneva Bible out of interest, and assume that it resulted from strong Trinitarian influence and the same translation is carried over into the KJV, despite Tyndale's correct translation. It is interesting that some on the translation panel of the RV and RSV preferred "I will be", including AB Davidson who was on the panel, but seem to have been overridden by the possibly conservative Trinitarian majority, and thus this future tense only appears in the margin. I understand that a correct understanding of the Yahweh Name is the key to unlocking this subject.
Kind regards
Trevor