Jesus atoned for the sins of the whole world

[Carbon]

Well you know what they say

If the shoe fits wear it

 

[Carbon]

Why should I care?

I disagree with Calvin on a number of things.

Are YOU claiming that Calvin's writings are infallible Scripture?

Calvin does not agree with Tom either, so Calvin must be wrong.

Why can’t everyone just agree and get along.

 

[Carbon]

Another non responsive reply

You appear to be specializing in that


Show where you answered my specific questions

John 12:47 (KJV)
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

according to the text why does Jesus not judge any who do not believe ?

Based on that what is the relation of the unbeliever to the world ?

and originally who did Jesus come to save in the world (according to the text)

and then compare

John 3:16-17 (KJV)
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Go back and look Tom. It’s a free country, and I choose not to do the work for you.

Take the professor hat off, this way you can see your questions and my answers, even though you don’t like them.

 

[Chalcedon]

And if one doesn't mix it with FAITH (Gifted by God), it doesn't mean squat.

I don’t know who would argue otherwise in this thread , maybe seth ?

 

[Chalcedon]

Oh wait he is still on another vacation

I don’t know who would argue otherwise in this thread , maybe seth ?

 

[Carbon]

Oh wait he is still on another vacation

On vacation or vacated?

 

[TomFL]

Why should I care?

I disagree with Calvin on a number of things.

Are YOU claiming that Calvin's writings are infallible Scripture?

That would be more of a Calvinist perspective

Notice he stated Jude speaks of the same subject

and Christ is the master in Jude 1:4

You offer only denial

 

[Theo1689]

That would be more of a Calvinist perspective

Notice he stated Jude speaks of the same subject

and Christ is the master in Jude 1:4

You offer only denial

Well, you remain unconvincing, and YOU are the one in “denial”, since you ignored every point I made in my original reply to you (as you always do).

 

[Chalcedon]

On vacation or vacated?

Self inflicted involuntary vaca

 

[Chalcedon]

That would be more of a Calvinist perspective

Notice he stated Jude speaks of the same subject

and Christ is the master in Jude 1:4

You offer only denial

Who is disputing Jude calls Jesus δεσπότην

 

[TomFL]

.

TomFL said:
You provide no proof of that

Despote is used of Christ in Jude

So what?
It's also used of the Father in Luke 2:29, Acts 4:24, and Rev. 6:10.

So Jude speaks of the same subject

Those in the church denying the master

Jude identifies Christ as the master

none of your citiations concern the same thing

So it appears to be arbitrary cherry-picking by you to ASSUME that it MUST be referring to Christ.

Hardly

Same subject and a clear reference to Jesus Christ

Can you quote one New Testament verse where the Father is stated to bought anyone and the price was not his sons blood

There is a reason Calvin came to the same conclusion I did

TomFL said:
The setting as in 2Peter concerns the church

So believers weren't created by God?
Is that what you're saying?

Is that what you read ?

Jude and Peter are speaking of the same thing and even Calvin agrees

Those in the church denying the master

Jude identifies Christ as the master

You can offer only denial

TomFL said:
Again no proof of anything

... in your posts.
And you are 100% correct.

Actually it was your post being refered to as you offer only denial

TomFL said:
In the church, men are bought with Christ's blood

Correct.
But that is not the context of 2 Pet. 2:1.

The context concerns Christ
2 Peter 1:16-18 (KJV)
16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

and the section heading in my KJV states Peter warns them to be constant in the faith of Christ

that leads into a warning about men denying him

TomFL said:
So Christ died even for the false prophets

Still wrong...

You did nothing to prove that offering only denial

Context, parallel passage, and Calvin all say you are wrong

 

[TomFL]

Who is disputing Jude calls Jesus δεσπότην

No one I know of

Theo is contradicting Calvin that Jude 1:4 speaks of the same thing as 2Pe 2:1

and denying Christ is the master of 2Pe 2:1 which Calvin affirmed

 

[TomFL]

Why should I care?

I disagree with Calvin on a number of things.

Are YOU claiming that Calvin's writings are infallible Scripture?

I am saying you have no support

Even the famous Calvinist commentary JFB disagrees with you

Lord—"Master and Owner" (Greek), compare Jude 1:4, Greek. Whom the true doctrine teaches to be their owner by right of purchase. Literally, "denying Him who bought them (that He should be thereby), their Master."





bought them—Even the ungodly were bought by His "precious blood." It shall be their bitterest self-reproach in hell, that, as far as Christ's redemption was concerned, they might have been saved. The denial of His propitiatory sacrifice is included in the meaning (compare 1John 4:3).


A Commentary: Critical, Experimental, and Practical on the Old and New Testaments.

It really looks like theology is driving your interpretation

 

[Carbon]

No one I know of

Theo is contradicting Calvin that Jude 1:4 speaks of the same thing as 2Pe 2:1

and denying Christ is the master of 2Pe 2:1 which Calvin affirmed

There is a way to resolve this issue Tom. Ask Theo1689, then consider what he has to say. Read his reply, two, three times if needed. Consider what he has to say.

Then, if he disagrees with Calvin in some areas.............SO WHAT!

 

[SovereignGrace]

There is a way to resolve this issue Tom. Ask Theo1689, then consider what he has to say. Read his reply, two, three times if needed. Consider what he has to say.

Then, if he disagrees with Calvin in some areas.............SO WHAT!

Tall order there, Buckaroo! He’s never done that, what makes you think he will now? If Dr. Flowers doesn’t say it, it doesn’t matter to him.

 

[Carbon]

Tall order there, Buckaroo! He’s never done that, what makes you think he will now? If Dr. Flowers doesn’t say it, it doesn’t matter to him.

I’m trying not to think what he will do. The benefit of the doubt thingy?

 

[TomFL]

Well, you remain unconvincing, and YOU are the one in “denial”, since you ignored every point I made in my original reply to you (as you always do).

LOL

Calvin disagreed with you

JFB disagreed with you

Barne's disagreed with you

His comment is note worthy

(1.) It is the obvious interpretation; that which would be given by the great mass of Christians, and about which there could never have been any hesitancy if it had not been supposed that it would lead to the doctrine of general atonement.
Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.

Again it appear your interpretation is driven by theology

and I would say it is you who is unconvincing

 

[SovereignGrace]

I’m trying not to think what he will do. The benefit of the doubt thingy?

There is benefit to doubting that which you know is impossible.

 

[Carbon]

LOL

Calvin disagreed with you

JFB disagreed with you

Barne's disagreed with you

His comment is note worthy

(1.) It is the obvious interpretation; that which would be given by the great mass of Christians, and about which there could never have been any hesitancy if it had not been supposed that it would lead to the doctrine of general atonement.
Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.

Again it appear your interpretation is driven by theology

and I would say it is you who is unconvincing

 

[Theo1689]

LOL

I'm glad you think Bible study is "amusing".

Calvin disagreed with you

So what?
Calvin disagrees with YOU on many points as well.
Do you consider Calvin to be infallible Scripture?

JFB disagreed with you

So what?
They disagree with YOU on many points as well.
Do you consider them to be infallible Scripture?

Barne's disagreed with you

It's "Barnes", not "Barne's".

And hopefully you can guess the rest of my reply (it parallels what you wrote above).

and I would say it is you who is unconvincing

Wrong again, on two points:

1) Just because you consider me unconvincing, doesn't mean that you aren't also unconvincing.

2) Since my purpose isn't EVEN to "convince" you of anything (why should I care what you believe?), it's impossible for me to be "unconvincing".