John 6 the context

[TomL]

Paul clearly emphasized the fact that he “had seen the Lord on the road and that he had talked to him”

The apostle Paul Was never even close to being deceived, how much of the New Testament did he write? Most of it? Just about.

Agreed. However, we have a poster here who holds the opposite view.

 

[civic]

The question of whether Jesus is the prophet is repeated throughout John, beginning in chapter 1, but at the end of John 5, Jesus tells them their accuser is Moses, who spoke of Him.

This leads to two "Moses-like" miracles, the feeding of 5000 and the water miracle (a crossing of the Sea of Galilee.) This leads the crowd to follow him and they begin to question him using Moses as an example. There is a bit of irony here since the example they give is the manna in the wilderness and Jesus has just fed them!

There are two other elements that come into play in this narrative, but they will need to wait a bit until I find some time. One that you might want to experiment with is how we should sentence-outline the section in question.

Another interesting fact in John 5-6 is Jesus using the biblical argument/fact of the testimony of 2/3 witnesses. Jesus goes even further with the testimony of Moses, the Father, the Miracles, Scripture and John the baptist.

 

[TomL]

Its replying against God, Everything is Gods will being done, everything God does is Good according to His Good pleasure Eph 1:9

So God predetermining most of mankind should be in the reprobate class is a good thing?

 

[brightfame52]

So God predetermining most of mankind should be in the reprobate class is a good thing?

Reread the post

 

[TomL]

Reread the post

Answer the question

Based on your statement

Its replying against God, Everything is Gods will being done, everything God does is Good according to His Good pleasure Eph 1:9

So God predetermining most of mankind should be in the reprobate class is a good thing?

 

[brightfame52]

Answer the question

Based on your statement

Its replying against God, Everything is Gods will being done, everything God does is Good according to His Good pleasure Eph 1:9

So God predetermining most of mankind should be in the reprobate class is a good thing?

Reread the post, and if God had decided to reprobate 100% of mankind, He is Good. You shouldn't stand in judgment of Gods Goodness. He reprobated 100% of the Angels that sinned, you dont say nothing about that.

 

[TomL]

Reread the post, and if God had decided to reprobate 100% of mankind, He is Good. You shouldn't stand in judgment of Gods Goodness. He reprobated 100% of the Angels that sinned, you dont say nothing about that.

Um, reprobation was not based on judgment but on God's sovereignty, according to Calvinism.

So is that an example of goodness.?

BTW seeing as you believe in determinism

Are rapes and murders good things?

 

[brightfame52]

Um, reprobation was not based on judgment but on God's sovereignty, according to Calvinism.

So is that an example of goodness.?

BTW seeing as you believe in determinism

Are rapes and murders good things?

if God had decided to reprobate 100% of mankind, He is Good.

 

[Kampioen]

if God had decided to reprobate 100% of mankind, He is Good.

And if God decided to give libertarian free will/synergism, and did,, then He is good. Who are we to complain?

 

[brightfame52]

And if God decided to give libertarian free will/synergism, and did,, then He is good. Who are we to complain?

He didn't decide that, He had decided that when man sinned in the garden he would surely die, that's what He decided in His sovereignty. There is no synergism when God raises up a dead person

 

[Kampioen]

He didn't decide that, He had decided that when man sinned in the garden he would surely die, that's what He decided in His sovereignty. There is no synergism when God raises up a dead person

God decided that man libertarianly sin in the Garden. Correct? It could have turned out that man didn't sin, correct? Was Adam dead?

But after they are raised up as Christians they can still sin. That's synergism, not monergism.

 

[brightfame52]

God decided that man libertarianly sin in the Garden. Correct? It could have turned out that man didn't sin, correct? Was Adam dead?

But after they are raised up as Christians they can still sin. That's synergism, not monergism.

When man had a freewill before he became a servant of sin, he freely chose to disobey God, and died. Now his will is dead in sin, in servitude to sin.

 

[civic]

When man had a freewill before he became a servant of sin, he freely chose to disobey God, and died. Now his will is dead in sin, in servitude to sin.

Nope the will never changed you made that up.

 

[Kampioen]

When man had a freewill before he became a servant of sin, he freely chose to disobey God, and died. Now his will is dead in sin, in servitude to sin.

I see the same individuals both live righteous and sin in the Old Testament. That's synergism, not monergism. Correct?

 

[civic]

I see the same individuals both live righteous and sin in the Old Testament. That's synergism, not monergism. Correct?

To hold true to his beliefs he would have to admit it’s Monergism as God is making them sin in the same way Gods makes them have faith. It’s not their choice it’s Gods. Most are not consistent enough Calvinists to face their doctrines in a practical way.

 

[brightfame52]

I see the same individuals both live righteous and sin in the Old Testament. That's synergism, not monergism. Correct?

Before supernatural resurrection from the dead, man is dead.

 

[Kampioen]

Before supernatural resurrection from the dead, man is dead.

And when man is alive he synergistically sins or not?

 

[brightfame52]

And when man is alive he synergistically sins or not?

Im not discussing that point. My point is before a person is made alive, he is dead. Man being made alive isnt synergistic, because he is dead

 

[civic]

Im not discussing that point. My point is before a person is made alive, he is dead. Man being made alive isnt synergistic, because he is dead

because you know you are wrong.

 

[Kampioen]

Im not discussing that point. My point is before a person is made alive, he is dead. Man being made alive isnt synergistic, because he is dead

Waking up a dead man is not synergistic. But if you wake up a dead man then he can make a choice. And you say that he can sin or not after being made alive. That's synergism, is it not? It's not like righteousness is all he does after that.