An Article on free will

@TomL

The Maltranslation "Freewill Offering", From Masoretic Texts by English Translators​


Almighty God impels people to make an offering in the Old Testament, in Truth (John 14:6).​


During the lifetime of Moses, this sequence of Hebrew letters אביהוא carried a specific contextual significance for a Hebrew language fluent person hearing or reading the Hebrew word.

During the Exodus, the same timeframe as Moses, another sequence of Hebrew letters נדב carried a specific contextual significance for a Hebrew language fluent person hearing or reading the Hebrew word.

The original language Holy Scripture communicae must be comprehensively transferred to a target language in order for the target language communicae to be called Biblical; otherwise, the target language is a broken Biblical translation, or, more accurately, an unholy translation.

These Hebrew words are masked, even a mystery for a person not fluent in or unfamiliar with the Hebrew language.

The Hebrew word אביהוא translates into English as "He is Father".

The Hebrew word נדב translates into English as "generous".

The Hebrew word אביהוא has been transliterated into English as "Abihu" (Strong's 30 - אֲבִיהוּא - Abihu - אביהוא - abh - an Israelite name, He is Father (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/30.htm)).

The Hebrew word נדב has been transliterated into English as "Nabab" (Strong's 5070 - נָדָ֨ב - Nadab - נדב - ndb - an Israelite name, generous, noble (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/5070.htm)).

Let us examine a passage where these names are mentioned as transliterations:


Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron (Leviticus 10:1, NASB)
Now, let us examine the same passage where these names are mentioned as translations:


Now Generous and He is Father, the sons of Aaron (Leviticus 10:1, NASB)
The translation expresses the concept as perceived by the Hebrew language communicator around the time of the Exodus.

The Hebrew word נדבה is another word that is contemporary with the Exodus, that is, in the lifetime of Moses and Moses' slightly elder brother named Aaron.

The Hebrew word נדב (generous) is the root Hebrew word for the Hebrew word נדבה which maintains the root word concept extended to include the concept of "offering". Both of these Hebrew words share exactly the same first 3 characters.

Cumulatively, נדבה (Strong's 5071 - נְדָבָ֖ה - nedabah - נדבה - ndbh - impelled generous offering (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/5071.htm)) denotes "generous offering", not "freewill offering" which is an unholy translation that deviates from the contemporary root word meaning of "generous".

Let us examine a passage where נדבה is translated into the deceptive form of "freewill offering" as the English translators and linguists abandon the Hebrew root word נדב (generous):


They received from Moses all the contributions which the sons of Israel had brought to perform the work in the construction of the sanctuary. And they still [continued] bringing to him freewill offerings every morning. (Exodus 36:3, NASB)
Now, let us examine the same passage where נדבה is translated into the truthful form of "generous offering" adhering to the Hebrew root word נדב (generous):


They received from Moses all the contributions which the sons of Israel had brought to perform the work in the construction of the sanctuary. And they still [continued] bringing to him generous offerings every morning. (Exodus 36:3, NASB)
Self-described linguistic expert Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D. neglects the Hebrew word חפשי which also occurs during the timeframe of Moses life.

The Hebrew word חפשי translates to the concept represented in by the English word free.

The concluding word in the following verse is חפשי (Strong's 2670 - חָפְשִׁי - chophshi - חפשי - chphsh - free):


But if the slave plainly says, "I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free," (Exodus 21:5)
The Hebrew word חפשי (free) is entirely different from the Hebrew word נדב (generous). The Hebrew language has these two distinct words for two distinct purposes.

The Hebrew word חפשי conveys the concept of free, liberated, detached, autonomous. This Hebrew word of חפשי (free) does not appear as a modifier to the concept of a person's will nor God's Will in all of Holy Scripture.

The Hebrew word נדב conveys the concept of generous, liberally, freely, plentiful. By extension, the Hebrew word נדבה (generous offering) maintains the meaning of it's root Hebrew word נדב (generous). All of these words are used in the Book of Exodus - all within the lifetime of Moses:

So this means the concepts expressed by these words must remain consistent.
Since חפשי (free) is not part of נדבה (generous offering), then wicked men practice the lawlessness (Matthew 7:21-23) of using "free-will offering" for נדבה (generous offering) after those men have been shown the Truth (John 14:6).

The Septuagint version of Exodus 35:29 reads:


And every man and woman whose mind inclined them to come in and do all the works as many as the Lord appointed them to do by Moses- they the children of Israel brought an offering to the Lord. (Exodus 35:29, Brenton)
The Septuagint Translation of the Old Testament (Torah) contains "an offering" with no mention of "freewill", so freewill is absent.

Freewill is not a part of the Hebrew word נדבה (generous offering) of which the English Bible translators/linguists moved from "freely" (plentiful, generous, abundant) over the centuries into "freewill", so "freewill offering" is not found in the Old Testament, but "impelled generous offering" is found in the Old Testament, and this Scriptural explanation demonstrates this fact.

At the time of the Exodus, when a person who spoke the Hebrew language heard the Hebrew word נדבה, then that person thought of the concept "generous", not "free-will", but truly "impelled generous offering"!

The written Hebrew language was a consonant only alphabet at the time of the Exodus during the lifetimes of Moses and Aaron.

Thousands of years later, vowels were introduced into the written Hebrew language. The Masoretes with their Masoretic Texts of post seventh century A.D. to pre fourteenth century A.D. added niqqud, in Hebrew orthography, a system of diacritical signs (dots and points) used to represent vowel letters in the formerly exclusively consonant written Hebrew alphabet.

Currently, the Masoretic words of נָדָ֨ב (nadab, generous, Strong's 5070) and נְדַב (nedab, to volunteer / offer freely, Strong's 5069) and נָדַב (nadab, to incite / impel, Strong's 5068) originate from exactly same Hebrew word of נדב (ndb, generous, Strong's 5070), and the evidence of this reality is visible by the removal of the Masoretic vowels leaving only the Hebrew consonants - just like the written Hebrew language existed in ancient times such as the lifetimes of Paul, Jesus, David, Moses, Aaron, and Aaron's son Generous (נדב).

These semantics demonstrate that distinguishing differences among נָדָ֨ב (nadab, Strong's 5070) and נְדַב (nedab, Strong's 5069) and נָדַב (nadab, Strong's 5068) is defective linguistics, even deceptive linguistics. נְדַב (nedab, to volunteer / offer freely, Strong's 5069) appears only in the Book of Ezra. נָדָ֨ב (nadab, generous, Strong's 5070) and נָדַב (nadab, to incite / impel, Strong's 5068) appear in the Book of Exodus.

The linguistic result illuminates the absence of the freewill concept from נדב (ndb, generous, Strong's 5070) while at the same time leaving the generous concept intact for נדב (ndb, Strong's 5070); therefore, נדבה (ndbh, Strong's 5071) means "generous offering", not "freewill offering", but "generous offering" in Truth (John 14:6).

The article FREEWILL AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE by Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D., instructor of church history, theology and biblical languages at Virginia Baptist College, fails to accurately explain the original Hebrew language as utilized by the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.

Dr. Wagner's bio even states he is a Biblical language expert, but he fails to know the Hebrew language.

Because of this fact, Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D. is a deceiver preaching free-will of man (2 Timothy 3:13), and people following Wagner are deceived by thinking that they have a free will capable of choosing Lord Jesus Christ unto salvation despite the fact that the Word of God states unequivocally:

  • "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God exclusively chooses people.
  • "I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
  • "What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.
 
Last edited:
@TomL

The Maltranslation "Freewill Offering", From Masoretic Texts by English Translators​


Almighty God impels people to make an offering in the Old Testament, in Truth (John 14:6).​


During the lifetime of Moses, this sequence of Hebrew letters אביהוא carried a specific contextual significance for a Hebrew language fluent person hearing or reading the Hebrew word.

During the Exodus, the same timeframe as Moses, another sequence of Hebrew letters נדב carried a specific contextual significance for a Hebrew language fluent person hearing or reading the Hebrew word.

The original language Holy Scripture communicae must be comprehensively transferred to a target language in order for the target language communicae to be called Biblical; otherwise, the target language is a broken Biblical translation, or, more accurately, an unholy translation.

These Hebrew words are masked, even a mystery for a person not fluent in or unfamiliar with the Hebrew language.

The Hebrew word אביהוא translates into English as "He is Father".

The Hebrew word נדב translates into English as "generous".

The Hebrew word אביהוא has been transliterated into English as "Abihu" (Strong's 30 - אֲבִיהוּא - Abihu - אביהוא - abh - an Israelite name, He is Father (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/30.htm)).

The Hebrew word נדב has been transliterated into English as "Nabab" (Strong's 5070 - נָדָ֨ב - Nadab - נדב - ndb - an Israelite name, generous, noble (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/5070.htm)).

Let us examine a passage where these names are mentioned as transliterations:

Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron (Leviticus 10:1, NASB)​
Now, let us examine the same passage where these names are mentioned as translations:

Now Generous and He is Father, the sons of Aaron (Leviticus 10:1, NASB)​
The translation expresses the concept as perceived by the Hebrew language communicator around the time of the Exodus.

The Hebrew word נדבה is another word that is contemporary with the Exodus, that is, in the lifetime of Moses and Moses' slightly elder brother named Aaron.

The Hebrew word נדב (generous) is the root Hebrew word for the Hebrew word נדבה which maintains the root word concept extended to include the concept of "offering". Both of these Hebrew words share exactly the same first 3 characters.

Cumulatively, נדבה (Strong's 5071 - נְדָבָ֖ה - nedabah - נדבה - ndbh - impelled generous offering (links to biblehub.com/hebrew/5071.htm)) denotes "generous offering", not "freewill offering" which is an unholy translation that deviates from the contemporary root word meaning of "generous".

Let us examine a passage where נדבה is translated into the deceptive form of "freewill offering" as the English translators and linguists abandon the Hebrew root word נדב (generous):

They received from Moses all the contributions which the sons of Israel had brought to perform the work in the construction of the sanctuary. And they still [continued] bringing to him freewill offerings every morning. (Exodus 36:3, NASB)​
Now, let us examine the same passage where נדבה is translated into the truthful form of "generous offering" adhering to the Hebrew root word נדב (generous):

They received from Moses all the contributions which the sons of Israel had brought to perform the work in the construction of the sanctuary. And they still [continued] bringing to him generous offerings every morning. (Exodus 36:3, NASB)​
Self-described linguistic expert Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D. neglects the Hebrew word חפשי which also occurs during the timeframe of Moses life.

The Hebrew word חפשי translates to the concept represented in by the English word free.

The concluding word in the following verse is חפשי (Strong's 2670 - חָפְשִׁי - chophshi - חפשי - chphsh - free):

But if the slave plainly says, "I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free," (Exodus 21:5)​
The Hebrew word חפשי (free) is entirely different from the Hebrew word נדב (generous). The Hebrew language has these two distinct words for two distinct purposes.

The Hebrew word חפשי conveys the concept of free, liberated, detached, autonomous. This Hebrew word of חפשי (free) does not appear as a modifier to the concept of a person's will nor God's Will in all of Holy Scripture.

The Hebrew word נדב conveys the concept of generous, liberally, freely, plentiful. By extension, the Hebrew word נדבה (generous offering) maintains the meaning of it's root Hebrew word נדב (generous). All of these words are used in the Book of Exodus - all within the lifetime of Moses:

So this means the concepts expressed by these words must remain consistent.
Since חפשי (free) is not part of נדבה (generous offering), then wicked men practice the lawlessness (Matthew 7:21-23) of using "free-will offering" for נדבה (generous offering) after those men have been shown the Truth (John 14:6).

The Septuagint version of Exodus 35:29 reads:

And every man and woman whose mind inclined them to come in and do all the works as many as the Lord appointed them to do by Moses- they the children of Israel brought an offering to the Lord. (Exodus 35:29, Brenton)​
The Septuagint Translation of the Old Testament (Torah) contains "an offering" with no mention of "freewill", so freewill is absent.

Freewill is not a part of the Hebrew word נדבה (generous offering) of which the English Bible translators/linguists moved from "freely" (plentiful, generous, abundant) over the centuries into "freewill", so "freewill offering" is not found in the Old Testament, but "impelled generous offering" is found in the Old Testament, and this Scriptural explanation demonstrates this fact.

At the time of the Exodus, when a person who spoke the Hebrew language heard the Hebrew word נדבה, then that person thought of the concept "generous", not "free-will", but truly "impelled generous offering"!

The written Hebrew language was a consonant only alphabet at the time of the Exodus during the lifetimes of Moses and Aaron.

Thousands of years later, vowels were introduced into the written Hebrew language. The Masoretes with their Masoretic Texts of post seventh century A.D. to pre fourteenth century A.D. added niqqud, in Hebrew orthography, a system of diacritical signs (dots and points) used to represent vowel letters in the formerly exclusively consonant written Hebrew alphabet.

Currently, the Masoretic words of נָדָ֨ב (nadab, generous, Strong's 5070) and נְדַב (nedab, to volunteer / offer freely, Strong's 5069) and נָדַב (nadab, to incite / impel, Strong's 5068) originate from exactly same Hebrew word of נדב (ndb, generous, Strong's 5070), and the evidence of this reality is visible by the removal of the Masoretic vowels leaving only the Hebrew consonants - just like the written Hebrew language existed in ancient times such as the lifetimes of Paul, Jesus, David, Moses, Aaron, and Aaron's son Generous (נדב).

These semantics demonstrate that distinguishing differences among נָדָ֨ב (nadab, Strong's 5070) and נְדַב (nedab, Strong's 5069) and נָדַב (nadab, Strong's 5068) is defective linguistics, even deceptive linguistics. נְדַב (nedab, to volunteer / offer freely, Strong's 5069) appears only in the Book of Ezra. נָדָ֨ב (nadab, generous, Strong's 5070) and נָדַב (nadab, to incite / impel, Strong's 5068) appear in the Book of Exodus.

The linguistic result illuminates the absence of the freewill concept from נדב (ndb, generous, Strong's 5070) while at the same time leaving the generous concept intact for נדב (ndb, Strong's 5070); therefore, נדבה (ndbh, Strong's 5071) means "generous offering", not "freewill offering", but "generous offering" in Truth (John 14:6).

The article FREEWILL AS TAUGHT IN SCRIPTURE by Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D., instructor of church history, theology and biblical languages at Virginia Baptist College, fails to accurately explain the original Hebrew language as utilized by the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.

Dr. Wagner's bio even states he is a Biblical language expert, but he fails to know the Hebrew language.

Because of this fact, Brian H. Wagner, Ph.D. is a deceiver preaching free-will of man (2 Timothy 3:13), and people following Wagner are deceived by thinking that they have a free will capable of choosing Lord Jesus Christ unto salvation despite the fact that the Word of God states unequivocally:

  • "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God exclusively chooses people.
  • "I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
  • "What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.
(ARV 2005) but without thy mind I would do nothing, that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(ASV-2014) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Anderson) but, without your consent, I was not willing to do any thing, that your good deed might not be as a matter of necessity, but one of free-will.
(ASV) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(FAA) but I did not want to do anything without your opinion, so that your good deed would not be as it were under compulsion, but of free will.
(GDBY_NT) but without your consent I did not wish to do anything; in order that your good might not be by constraint, but by the free will:
(GW) Yet, I didn't want to do anything without your consent. I want you to do this favor for me out of your own free will without feeling forced to do it.
(csb) But I didn't want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.
(LEB) But apart from your consent, I wanted to do nothing, in order that your good deed might be not as according to necessity, but according to your own free will.
(MRC) but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness might not be by necessity, but of your own free will.
(MNT) But without your consent I was unwilling to do anything, so that your kindness to me might be of your own free will, and not of compulsion.
(NTVR) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Revised Standard ) but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will.
(RNT) but without your consent I am unwilling to do anything, so that your goodness may not be of necessity but of free will.
(RSV-CE) but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will.
(TLV) But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your goodness wouldn’t be by force but by free will.
(WEB) But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(WEB (R)) But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Wuest's) Georgia;;14-16 But I came to a decision in my heart to do nothing without your consent, in order that your goodness might not be as it were by compulsion but of your own free will. For perhaps on this account he was parted for a brief time in order that you might be possessing him fully and forever, no longer in the capacity of a slave, but above a slave, a brother , a beloved one, beloved most of all by me, how much more than that by you, both in his human relationship and in the Lord.
(NASB77) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.
(NASB95) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.
(TEV) 14 However, I do not want to force you to help me; rather, I would like for you to do it of your own free will. So I will not do anything unless you agree.
(ERV) 14 but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(NHEB) 14 But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(TCE) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.
and you can add both the NEB and the REB

CT 14 but I would not do any thing without thy consent, that the benefit derived from thee might not be as it were forced, but of free will.



NENT 14
but without thy: mind I wished to do nothing; that thy: goodness be not as of necessity, but of free will.

SLT 14 But without thy judgment I would do nothing; that good might not be as according to necessity, but according to free will.



(NEB)
14 But I would rather do nothing without your consent, so that your kindness may be a matter not of compulsion, but of your own free will.



(REB) 14 But I would rather do nothing without your consent, so that your kindness may be a matter not of compulsion, but of your own free will.

(RASV)but without your consent I would do nothing; that your goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.

(UASV)but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by necessity but of your own free will.
 
Read it again, because your writing there has no respect nor honor for the Word of God which God causes me to proclaim to you "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) as well as "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19, includes salvation) as well as "What I say to you I say to all" (Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so Christ alone causes man to be saved from the wrath of God, not a free-will choosing of God by man, but truly my Lord and my God Jesus Christ exclusively chooses people unto salvation! Praise Jesus!!!

Based on your writing above, you cannot be Jesus Christ's friend despite your "Yes" to the question "Do you think you are a friend of Jesus, TomL?" because you express conflicted thoughts about the population of Christ's "you" in the passage. I remind you for this exchange that I consider you to write "apostles" whenever you write "disciples".

Let's take a look at Lord Jesus Christ's usage of "you" with which the above question and answer pertains:
I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. You did not choose Me but I chose you
(John 15:15-16 (you replied to a fully quoted John 15:14-19 (links to KJV, NASB1995, and YLT)))​

Your response of "Yes" shows your personal claim of being part of the "you" population inside of God's blessing of "I have called you friends" (John 15:15), but then in the continuation of the very same blessing, your heart's "it was Christ words [exclusively] to the disciples messengers he had chosen" eliminates you, TomL, from being a part of the "you" population inside of God's blessing of "I chose you" (John 15:16); therefore, you are not a chosen friend of Jesus according to your own self-willed heart's treasure which leavens your whole loaf of free-willian philosophy (Matthew 16:6).

In effect, your "Yes" and "it was Christ words [exclusively] to the disciples messengers he had chosen" expresses a confused (1 Corinthians 14:33) "Yes No" concept about the audience represented in Christ's "you" recorded in John 15:14-19.

You wrote "Nothing there concerning on what basis he chose them" which conveys your thoughts that, somehow, the Apostles chose Jesus thus your purported choice executed by the Apostle's is your purported "basis" for Jesus choosing the Apostles, yet every Christian's Lord Jesus Christ says "you did not choose Me" (John 15:16), so God eliminates any purported free-will choosing by man towards God; therefore, your "basis" conjecture provides only shifting sand diversion away from the Truth (John 14:6) for you.



"I and the Father are One" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 10:30), so Almighty God says "Yours they were, and you gave them to me" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 17:6); therefore, your "How they became the father's ins not stated" along with your free-willian philosophy is false because King Jesus says with unrestricted application "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) as well as "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19, includes salvation) as well as "What I say to you I say to all" (Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned by the Word of God above are to all believers in all time! All praise and glory and honor be to the Sovereign Lord and God Jesus Christ!!!

The blessed Word of God that only He alone causes men to enter the Kingdom of God:
  • "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God chooses people to be friends (John 15:15, the prior verse) and to believe (John 6:29) and to be born again (John 3:3-8) and for righteous works (John 3:21, John 15:5) and to repent (Matthew 11:25) and to love (John 13:34) and unto salvation (John 15:19 the same passage).
  • "I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
  • "What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.

The only way for free-willian philosophers to acheive free-will is for them to add to the Word of God, and it is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6).

No Holy Scripture states man has a free-will.

Every person has a will, but a person's will is either one of but not both of (1) a self-will against God in evil for the natural flesh person (2 Peter 2:9-10) or (2) a will in Christ doing God's good by the Holy Spirit for the Born of God (Romans 8:29, Philippians 2:13, John 3:3-8).
It's real simple, show me where the word unconditional appears along with salvation

It doesn't

it is nowhere found in the scriptures

So you still beg the question.
 
Do you ever address a text?

Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

righteous depends on having faith
 
Do you ever address a text?

Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

righteous depends on having faith
That's not fair
 
Job 42:2 (NASB 2020) — 2 “I know that You can do all things, And that no plan is impossible for You.

Says nothing about God always getting what he desires

1 Timothy 2:4 (ESV) — 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Job 42:2 "I know you can do all things and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted".

What prevents God from saving all people?
 
So that's it? 7 words from you do away with all the many whole passages of scripture which show in various places that God is grieved that his will is not always done. Maybe you need to understand the context of the verse you've quoted?

I guess a good question is if you believe the will of God is always done he must always be walking in a state of being pleased correct?
No, He's angry. The almighty will of man, which He is simply unable to overcome, wins out sometimes. You win some and you lose some. I'm sure no one tries harder then our omnipotent God.
 
That's not fair
Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

righteous depends on having faith
 
(ARV 2005) but without thy mind I would do nothing, that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(ASV-2014) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Anderson) but, without your consent, I was not willing to do any thing, that your good deed might not be as a matter of necessity, but one of free-will.
(ASV) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(FAA) but I did not want to do anything without your opinion, so that your good deed would not be as it were under compulsion, but of free will.
(GDBY_NT) but without your consent I did not wish to do anything; in order that your good might not be by constraint, but by the free will:
(GW) Yet, I didn't want to do anything without your consent. I want you to do this favor for me out of your own free will without feeling forced to do it.
(csb) But I didn't want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will.
(LEB) But apart from your consent, I wanted to do nothing, in order that your good deed might be not as according to necessity, but according to your own free will.
(MRC) but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness might not be by necessity, but of your own free will.
(MNT) But without your consent I was unwilling to do anything, so that your kindness to me might be of your own free will, and not of compulsion.
(NTVR) but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Revised Standard ) but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will.
(RNT) but without your consent I am unwilling to do anything, so that your goodness may not be of necessity but of free will.
(RSV-CE) but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own free will.
(TLV) But I didn’t want to do anything without your consent, so that your goodness wouldn’t be by force but by free will.
(WEB) But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(WEB (R)) But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(Wuest's) Georgia;;14-16 But I came to a decision in my heart to do nothing without your consent, in order that your goodness might not be as it were by compulsion but of your own free will. For perhaps on this account he was parted for a brief time in order that you might be possessing him fully and forever, no longer in the capacity of a slave, but above a slave, a brother , a beloved one, beloved most of all by me, how much more than that by you, both in his human relationship and in the Lord.
(NASB77) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.
(NASB95) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.
(TEV) 14 However, I do not want to force you to help me; rather, I would like for you to do it of your own free will. So I will not do anything unless you agree.
(ERV) 14 but without thy mind I would do nothing; that thy goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(NHEB) 14 But I was willing to do nothing without your consent, that your goodness would not be as of necessity, but of free will.
(TCE) 14 but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.
and you can add both the NEB and the REB

CT 14 but I would not do any thing without thy consent, that the benefit derived from thee might not be as it were forced, but of free will.



NENT 14
but without thy: mind I wished to do nothing; that thy: goodness be not as of necessity, but of free will.

SLT 14 But without thy judgment I would do nothing; that good might not be as according to necessity, but according to free will.



(NEB)
14 But I would rather do nothing without your consent, so that your kindness may be a matter not of compulsion, but of your own free will.



(REB) 14 But I would rather do nothing without your consent, so that your kindness may be a matter not of compulsion, but of your own free will.

(RASV)but without your consent I would do nothing; that your goodness should not be as of necessity, but of free will.

(UASV)but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by necessity but of your own free will.

As was shown to you in post #270, the Apostle Paul uses free-will in the illusory sense - as an illusion - when he wrote "but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will" (Philemon 1:14). I don't suspect that you want to fulfill the proverb "Like a dog that returns to its vomit Is a fool who repeats his folly" (Proverbs 26:11). Paul uses free-will not in the concrete sense but in the illusory sense, so this is no proof text of man possessing a free will, after all, this same Apostle wrote "the love of Christ controls us" (2 Corinthians 5:14).

The Bondage Of A Man's Will​


Free-willians, in a respect, are correct that "there's no difference between self will and free will", and that respect is that both self will and free will lead to hell.

Now, instead of listening to themselves lie with things like "Free will is all through the scriptures", they need to listen to Apostolic testimony as shown below.

Peter the Apostle wrote that prior to being saved, people have a self will that brings such people under damnation with the devil according to the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Paul the Apostle wrote that after being saved, people have a will that is bound under the loving control of God according to the Apostle Paul (Philippians 2:13).

Here's Paul from the Bible, again. Overall, Paul uses free will as illusory instead of concrete in Philemon 1:14 - and this is the only occurrence of "free will" that I am aware of in the New American Standard Bible New Testament.

Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter.

Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will and the Christ of us Christians Who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) and "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19). We Christians in God's Spirit have a will bound enthusiastically in joy and love to God by God for God through God, as described by the Word of God.

The above mentioned Apostolic testimony verbatim:

  • "the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority; daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties" (2 Peter 2:9-10).
  • "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).
  • "but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will" (Philemon 1:14).

God saves us children of God from the wrath of God by God's grace for God's glory! Praise be to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
 
Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

righteous depends on having faith
The elect are made righteous by Christs one action of obedience. Rom 5:19

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

No such scripture says:

righteous depends on having faith
 
The elect are made righteous by Christs one action of obedience. Rom 5:19

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

No such scripture says:
You have problems reading

Romans 9:30–32 (KJV 1900) — 30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. 31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

righteous depends on having faith
 
The KJV you quotes, was thatca English translation? LOL How does the NKJV translate Job 42:2?

How does the bible that Knox and Calvin trusted translate it?

In fact, quote it the bible Calvin and Knox trusted. You can't even find a contemporary to Calvin that quotes Job 42:2. Go for it.

Things have changed significantly since Calvin. We could spends days talking about what Calvin didn't do that modern "Calvinists" now insist is essentials of the faith.

You would think that you actually know these things if you're going to defend someone position as your own.

It really isn't your own. You're just parroting what little you know about it.
 
How does the bible that Knox and Calvin trusted translate it?

In fact, quote it the bible Calvin and Knox trusted. You can't even find a contemporary to Calvin that quotes Job 42:2. Go for it.

Things have changed significantly since Calvin. We could spends days talking about what Calvin didn't do that modern "Calvinists" now insist is essentials of the faith.

You would think that you actually know these things if you're going to defend someone position as your own.

It really isn't your own. You're just parroting what little you know about it.
You did not answer my question. Is the KJV you quoted a English translation?

How does the NKJV translate Job 42:2

I figured I would repeat them since you are now off to deflectionville.
 
You did not answer my question. Is the KJV you quoted a English translation?

I didn't quote the KJV.

How does the NKJV translate Job 42:2

I figured I would repeat them since you are now off to deflectionville.

Who cares what any of the KJV's say. I don't. The Geneva Bible is a far better translation. I quoted the Geneva.

I was trying to lead you to information. You're impervious to actually learning anything. Calvin, Knox and Coverdale all had commentary and notes in the Geneva Bible. Calvinism first flourished in Geneva. Not England.

You're a hack of epic proportions. Just a pretender and sock puppet of other forum's Calvinists.
 
You did not answer my question. Is the KJV you quoted a English translation?

How does the NKJV translate Job 42:2

I figured I would repeat them since you are now off to deflectionville.

I didn't quote the KJV.



Who cares what any of the KJV's say. I don't. The Geneva Bible is a far better translation. I quoted the Geneva.

I was trying to lead you to information. You're impervious to actually learning anything. Calvin, Knox and Coverdale all had commentary and notes in the Geneva Bible. Calvinism first flourished in Geneva. Not England.

You're a hack of epic proportions. Just a pretender and sock puppet of other forum's Calvinists.
Your quote of Job 42:2 is identical to the KJV. Which the NKJV has changed.

You could not lead a drunk to a bar. Spare me

Again, your void of a substantive arguement so it's to ad hom attacks. Typical
 
Your quote of Job 42:2 is identical to the KJV. Which the NKJV has changed.

No I didn't. I quoted the Geneva Bible. Do you know there are several different editions of the KJV? Do you know that there are Cambridge and Oxford variances since the KJV was produced under copyright in England?

It would do you good to actually study.

You could not lead a drunk to a bar. Spare me

I can see that you enjoy the damnation of others. Why would you try to lead a drunk to a bar? Your thoughts obviously only center around your own desires.

I wouldn't even try to lead a drunk to a bar.

Again, your void of a substantive arguement so it's to ad hom attacks. Typical

Nonsense. You've been avoiding the truth of this from the beginning. You're never around when @brightfame52 is around. Add the fact that you both act exactly like one another and I believe we have our answer.

To me, you're doing nothing but trolling.
 
Back
Top Bottom