I guess it must hurt when you are unable to address rebuttal
1 John 5:1 Naively Wrenched.
- Thread starter Jabez
- Start date
TibiasDad
Well-known member
Yes, and this is in the direct context of 5:1. The argument is that the perfect tense necessarily causes the present tense, which is falsified by 5:10!
Doug
TibiasDad
Well-known member
If you are persuaded, then you believe what is said. Belief in the message of the gospel is to have faith in it. Paul says that his whole ministry is to persuade men. (2 Cor 5:11) Indeed, the truth of the gospel cannot be fully grasped sans the Spirit's conviction of its truth, but the preaching to persuade is the means He uses to persuade.
Doug
Not to mention the fact there are many verses which show faith precedes regeneration
Calvinist methodology here often seems to be grab one verse their theology can be read into and then ignore everything that is contrary to that
Reformedguy
Well-known member
I agree with you. The preaching is the means the Holy Spirit uses to persuade and thereby bring understanding.
Reformedguy
Well-known member
Yup, by the Spirit. Read Doug's post and mine a little more closely
You read Doug's post he is not speaking of the holy Spirit preaching and persuading directly
Paul says that his whole ministry is to persuade men. (2 Cor 5:11) Indeed, the truth of the gospel cannot be fully grasped sans the Spirit's conviction of its truth, but the preaching to persuade is the means He uses to persuade.
Hello
As i asked you previously and you did not respond
How did you come to hear the gospel?
Reformedguy
Well-known member
No one said the Holy Spirit preaches. Quote me
My friends dad was a preacher. The assistant pastor at his church stopped while I was playing basketball and shared with me the gospel. By the Spirit I understood and professed faith in Christ.
Hello
If the holy spirit is not preaching then man is hello
According to Doug's post the Holy spirit uses man to preach the truth and persuade
As for your statement
it was a man who preached
The holy spirit used a man to convey truth to you and to persuade you
what did the Holy Spirit do so you could understand the mans word
Reformedguy
Well-known member
Who said the Holy Spirit had to preach? Paul preaching is a means to a end. He is used by God. Paul waters, God gives the increase.
I agree with Doug and he agreed with me. The part you left out. Understanding comes by the Spirit.
Did you read
According to Doug's post the Holy spirit uses man to preach the truth and persuade
As for your statement
it was a man who preached
The holy spirit used a man to convey truth to you and to persuade you
what did the Holy Spirit do so you could understand the mans word
if so were you unable to understand the English language without the holy spirit
as Even Matt slick and JD Martin had to agree with Wayne Mcgrew in their respective debates man could understand the gospel
Matt has even once spoke of an atheist who was able to accurately present the gospel
so what prevented you from understanding the man's words
Theo1689
Well-known member
Wow..
So we have Doug, quoting Tom, quoting David Allen quoting Brian Abasciano (get the spelling right, Tom!).
A quarternary source from a group of people who don't know what they're talking about, since none of them understand Greek.
Participles are "verbal adjectives", and acting as adjectives, do not have a temporal aspect or "tense". Grammatically speaking, a Greek participle can be in the present, aorist, or perfect "tense", but this is only a description of how the word is formed, and does not convey the temporal sense that actual verbs do.
This is why Dr. Bill Mounce prefers different terms:
"continuous participle (for "present" participle);
"undefined participle" (for "aorist" participle);
And the "perfect" participle simply indicates a completed action.
Now if you really want to go to 1 John 5:10 and try to force your interpretation:
1John 5:10 Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son.
"has made God a liar".
Obviously, God is not a liar, so this is a hypothetical statement.
But someone not believing (even if this had "present" tense time, which it doesn't) doesn't "then" make God a liar, it would mean he had been a liar in the past, and continues to be in the present.
So there is no issue here, and nothing to "disprove" the Reformed interpretation of 5:1.
It's interesting to note that nobody wants to interpret 5:1 based on the PARALLEL passages (2:29, 3:9, 4:7, 5:4, 18), "everyone who <present> has been born of God", but instead tries to debunk it with a verse that has an ENTIRELY different construction!
It's almost like you aren't really interested in the true meaning.
Perhaps Mr. Abasciano could call into the Dividing Line and get James White's response, or try to contact Dr. Mounce or Dr. Wallace.
David1701
Well-known member
That's why I have that poster on "ignore", and I'm not the only one.
G
guest1
Guest
You haven’t leaned that the appealing to authority is only a valid argument if a Calvinist is making it otherwise it becomes the appeal to authority fallacy by the opposition . That way they can have their cake and eat it too.
Double standards anyone ?
Oh silly me imagining they should be held to the same standard
G
guest1
Guest
I’m sure I’ll get ticketed by the resident spell check policeman for misspelling learned in my previous post ? from using my iPhone ?
Carbon
Super Member
Same here
Reformedguy
Well-known member
And I agree with him. But it is the Spirit that gives understanding. Preaching us a means to a end.
But he is so insightful ?
You can't beat something with nothing
All you are accomplishing is a failure to defend your theology
but that happens whether you respond or not