2 Pet. 3:9 Defeats the Arminian/Open Theist view of Scripture

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Godrulz-----------If it is not an individual election, as you say, why is it that God wrote each of their names were written down in the Lamb's book of life from the foundation of the world? Is THAT NOT INDIVIDUAL? Is YOUR name individual, or is your name corporate?

See Rev. 13:8

Greek grammar is the key...try another translation:

NIV (alternate legit. translation...scholars differ)

"All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast- all whose names have not been written (Greek tense...names added one by one through the years rather than in eternity past) in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world."

- the Lamb was not literally slain at creation, but the potential, formulated plan of redemption now became a certain plan after the Fall...He died thousands of years later (actual fulfillment of the plan)...the Lamb was slain from creation (not literal), not that the names were written from before creation...they were added as individuals joined the corporate body of believers. God purposed/elected Israel/Church, but did not predestine individuals to be in heaven or hell. Faith or unbelief determines destiny or whether one is in or outside the group known as the people of God.

I Pet. 1:20..The Redeemer was chosen as a formulated plan (before creation of the world) that was implemented in history AFTER the Fall (Gen. 3...because you have done this, I will send the Redeemer).

cf. Rev. 17:8 names added one by one as they repent/believe starting at the beginning of human history...not that every future, non-existent person had their name written in a book trillions of years ago.

Rev. 3:5 implies the possibility of having one's name erased if they do not overcome. The book is flexible, vs fixed.

Rev. 13:8 is not a proof-text against corporate election (unless you have a pre-conceived theology). Robert Shank (Southern Baptist) makes a strong biblical case for corporate election (as do many others).

 

[godrulz]

Sword:

Trace the history of the doctrine of 'immutability' through Augustine as He was influenced by Plato and Philo. Calvin then adopted this idea.

As I posted, immutability refers to God's essential character (He is unchanging in holiness, love, faithfulness, etc.) and His unique attributes (He always will be triune, Creator, uncreated, omnipresent/omniscient/omnipotent, eternal, etc.).

A straightforward reading of Scripture (His Story) shows a God who changes in His dispositions, relationships, thoughts, actions, feelings, etc. He changes because He is personal, dynamic, alive....e.g. He had a specific relationship with Adam that changed after the Fall. The incarnation is a change in space-time history that affected the Godhead. He said creation is very good...then (sequence) He was grieved and changed his intentions...I will wipe it out...The creature, in the image of God, is not greater than the Creator in ability to experience personal attributes. This does not detract from His perfection or unchangeable qualities, but reflects every page of the Bible and His revelation of His nature and ways.

 

[Rolf Ernst]

God rulz--the scriptural concept of immutability is--"known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18

"Remember the former things of old, for I am God and there is no other. I am God and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying my counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure." Isa.46:9,10

"...the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning." James 1:17

" known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Godrulz--the corporate body of Christ is made up of individual believers chosen individually, "according as He has chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." Eph, 1:4
Individuals were given to Christ as His seed. To individuals He is their "everlasting Father." As Adam had certain ones in him, so also Christ had given to Him certain ones on behalf of whom He is their federal head. This is not the impersonal coporate whole in any regard, but the number of individuals chosen who, together make up the whole bodsy of Christ. Slice it any way you like, the body of Christ is made up of individuals with differing gifts according to His pleasure.

 

[smaller]

God's Word regarding the SALVATION OF ALL MANkind is like the plague for most believers.

They are afraid to even touch it.

"GOD IS THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN, e-s-p-e-c-i-a-l-l-y those who believe." (1 Tim. 4:10)

Not "potential saviour" not "maybe" saviour. Saviour.

clete- Impossible! GOD IS ONLY EFFECTIVE IF I SAY SO!

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Godrulz--concerning your saying that Proverbs 8 is the personificatiojn of wisdom and has nothing to do with salvation: Christ is the personification of wisdom, and Proverbs eight is about the covenant of redemption in which Christ was "brought forth" as the wisdom of God before the foundation of the world (which is largely expressed in Prov. 8, which is about the covenant of redemption struck before He created the highest part of the dust of the earth. Verses 30 and 31 refer to Christ and His rejoicing in the creation and in those given to Him before the creation of the world.
That involves salvation.

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Godrulz--concerning your saying that Proverbs 8 is the personificatiojn of wisdom and has nothing to do with salvation: Christ is the personification of wisdom, and Proverbs eight is about the covenant of redemption in which Christ was "brought forth" as the wisdom of God before the foundation of the world (which is largely expressed in Prov. 8, which is about the covenant of redemption struck before He created the highest part of the dust of the earth. Verses 30 and 31 refer to Christ and His rejoicing in the creation and in those given to Him before the creation of the world.
That involves salvation.

Christ is the wisdom of God, but Proverbs is wisdom literature. In context it honestly is a personification of wisdom, not a didactic passage about Christ (read the whole chapter e.g. v. 12 "I, wisdom...")

 

[godrulz]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

God rulz--the scriptural concept of immutability is--"known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18

"Remember the former things of old, for I am God and there is no other. I am God and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying my counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure." Isa.46:9,10

"...the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning." James 1:17

" known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18

James 1:17 refers to His solid character that is not fickle.

Is. 46:9,10 refers to things that God purposes to bring to pass by His ability. It does not mean that every mundane and moral choice is predestined. He predestines some, but not all things.

Acts 15:8 quotes Amos 9:11,12 and is a specific promise that God, by His ability, will restore Israel (and include the Gentiles in His plan). It is not a general proof text saying that God predestines individuals before they are born to chose to know or reject Him (Church). He knows that He will restore Israel based on His covenant with them.

Acts 15:18 "...says the Lord, who does these things that have been known for ages." He prophesies and does things by His power (not foreknowledge).

'known to the Lord for ages is his work..." is only in some MSS....don't build a doctrine on a verse with 2 legit. translations that does not have the context or conclusion you are trying to force on it (context is not about individual election but the restoration of Israel and Gentiles collectively, who are made up of individuals who believe).

 

[*Acts9_12Out*]

1Way,

You said,

So, Jeremy, how do you get that Greek font to work? Ok, I used the symbol font, but I don’t know if it works right or not since my bible study program does not use symbol for my Greek font. There is a slight difference between the OLB and the Symbol fonts, do you just fix the odd characters manually if necessary?

I wish I had a program that automatically inserted greek fonts. I use the vb tags bold, size=3 and font=symbol and manually type in the letters. I have been studying Greek with Bob Hill for almost 8 years now, and know many of the "popular" passages by heart in the original. BTW, excellent points raised. Just think if I inserted "come" into my passage...

John 2:6b
...water pots coming twenty or thirty gallons apiece.

That's crazy! Keep up the good work brother!

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Acts 9_12 out---Where does God's word say anything about Him choosing certain ones in Christ before the foundation of the world?
You say it doesn't?

Try Ephesians 1:4; Prov. 8:22-31; Jer. 31:3 and 1 Pet. 1:2.

Rolf,

Out of all the points I raised, this is the only thing you respond to? The topic of this thread is 2 Peter 3:9. 1 Way and I have shown how a correct translation of the passage clears up your "apparent" problem for us. Again, God is not "counseling" all of the elect to come to repentance, but rather "counsels" all to have room for repentance. This passage single-handedly affirms zero-point calvinism to be true. God's counseling all to have room for repentance is the point everyone here is missing...

--Jeremy

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Acts 19_12 out---My, My! How conveniently you translate to fit your aim. To bad that all those translators who are capable of translating the whole Bible didn't choose to use YOUR words. Maybe they were just interested in dealing with the Scripture honestly. I dar say that your whipped-up translation is not as reliable as theirs.

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Godrulz--you dismiss the message concerning Christ in Proverbs.
He didn't. Don't be so eager to not hear the word of God in your zeal for a God dishonoring heresy known as Arminianism.

I wonder if it could reach an Arminian heart if I cited a verse in which Christ Himself refers to Himself as the wisdom of God? HMMM?
"Therefore the wisdom of God also said, "I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute."" Lk. 11:49 Compare that with Mt. 23:34 in which Christ says,

"...I send you prophets, wise men and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city."

Your dismissing the impact of the Scripture's testimony concerning Christ in Proverbs eight reminds me of the time when Jesus "...expounded to them in ALL the scriptures the things concerning Himself." Lk.24:27 Today's disciples need to see Him in Scripture rather than overlook him as had those on the road to Emmaus.

Don't conveniently ignore the main point of this post--that Christ referred to Himself as the wisdom of God.

 

[godrulz]

A few allegorical translators have wrongly seen Proverbs 8 as primarily a Christological passage (eisegesis). Most literal, grammatical, contextual, historical interpreters (normative) know Christ is the wisdom of God from a verse in the NT, but still recognize the primary interpretation of Prov. 8 as a personification of wisdom (consistent with the Book of Proverbs as wisdom literature, not as didactic, Christological, or Messianic prophecies). Walk through Prov. 8 verse by verse. It would be straining things to see this as a direct allusion to Christ. Why not say Prov. 9 is about Christ since it continues in the same style? There is much figurative language here (sends out her maids, mixes her wine...etc. what does that have to do with Christ?).

It is also interesting that JWs (cult) use Prov. 8:22 ff. as a proof-text for Arianism (Christ is a created angel). This is refuted by recognizing the context of wisdom literature is not about Christ, but wisdom personified.

This is similar to the allegorical interpreters (subjective) who see Song of Songs/Solomon (Hebraic poetic literature) as primarily about Christ and the Church (there is an application by way of principle). Most recognize the primary interpretation is simply a book of romantic, human love. You can preach an allegorical message from it, but that was not the primary intention as the Spirit inspired the book to be recorded (your breasts are like coconuts, your hair is like a flock of goats, etc.).

If you use a similar allegorical method (like some old commentators do) with the Book of Revelation, you will end up with a subjective mess reading every current event back into the book.

So, Christ is the wisdom of God but Prov. 8 is not the place to be making a big doctrine about redemption. More explicit passages should be used that are not wisdom literature (vs didactic). Every reference in the Bible to the 'wisdom of God' is not Christological (that would be a gross interpretation error).

Your view is a theory and a minority view. I would not be dogmatic about it.

 

[1Way]

we used their translation to show the contrary rendition in 2Pet 3.9 as self refuting

we used their translation to show the contrary rendition in 2Pet 3.9 as self refuting

Rolf – We presented the same translation’s use in the other instances demonstrating their own inconsistent contrary use even with the same word and voice tense mode. If you trust 2Pet 3.9 should be translated “come (to)”, instead of “make room (for)”, then do you discredit the translater’s accuracy in John 21:25 where the same word with the same voice tense mood is translated “could contain” which is essentially the same idea as “have room”?

If not then you are not understanding our point. We are simply observing two things.

1) They translated the same word inconsistently, also same with various forms of the same root word.

2) Their variance of meaning observed is shown to be self correcting by simply swapping the alternate renderings to see which rendering naturally conforms to the contextual development.

As to the first, various renderings are common and standard practice, but this inconsistency involves more than just accepted variance within the of scope of the word’s meaning. When we consider the other uses, it is obvious that 2Pet 3.9 is wrong because of the contradictory unbiblical nature of the meaning when examined in the other occurrences documented for your consideration.

Evidently you don’t appreciate or understand what has been presented for your consideration, or you simply don’t want to.

 

[*Acts9_12Out*]

Rolf,

You started this thread about 2 Peter 3:9 and gave us your "opinion" of it. You "interpreted" the passage for us all, and told us what you think. I have taken the time to learn God's original language to better understand His hidden treasures. I offer Scriptural evidence to show that God intended something other than what your calvinist brethern "translated." I showed that your initial premise was in error. How do you respond?

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Acts 19_12 out---My, My! How conveniently you translate to fit your aim. To bad that all those translators who are capable of translating the whole Bible didn't choose to use YOUR words. Maybe they were just interested in dealing with the Scripture honestly. I dar say that your whipped-up translation is not as reliable as theirs.

The burden of proof is on you to explain away the true meaning of cwreo. Check any Greek lexicon to see what that word really means. Again, the burden of proof is on you to explain to us all why your calvinist brethern misrepresent Scripture and mistranslate words to fit their presuppositions. I challenge you to research the word to see what it means. I challenge you to run a concordance of the word to see how the word is continually translated. Good luck...

--Jeremy

 

[GodsfreeWill]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Acts 19_12 out---My, My! How conveniently you translate to fit your aim. To bad that all those translators who are capable of translating the whole Bible didn't choose to use YOUR words. Maybe they were just interested in dealing with the Scripture honestly. I dar say that your whipped-up translation is not as reliable as theirs.

I wouldn't trust someone making an idiotic statement such as this. How do you know that "all those translators are capable" of translating the Bible? If they all are so capable, then why do they disagree with each other? Not one translator EVER has given you a reason why he translated 2 Peter 3:9 the way that he did, but you believe it, and when Acts9 actually gives you scriptural proof of why it should be translated such, you deny it because it doesn't fit your theological beliefs. Unbelieveable.... Like he said, the burden of proof is on you to show how it actually should be translated, that is if you even have an understanding of the original language.

Your biggest problem, as a calvinist, is that 2 Peter 3:9 says "not counseling that any should perish." God's "boule" will is His counsel, His determined purpose, His design. How then, according to calvinism, can God "not counsel" something? I thought according to your calvinistic beliefs, that God counseled EVERYTHING. I thought EVERYTHING was predetermined by God. I guess not....

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Amazing how arrogant you Arminians are. Each of you esteems himself a better translator of Scripture than those who have poured their whole lives into textual accuracy; but when their translations show your God dishonoring doctrines to be a lie, you think you can "translate" your way out of that. As for those who refer to"calvinistic" interpreters--if you knew anything about the care taken in translating the various versions, you would know that these translations are not done by one individual, nor by men of only one doctrinal persuasion. They are agreed upon by men of differing theological persuasions and guess what--none of them have seen fit to use YOUR makeshift evasion of the real meaning of 2 Pet. 3:9, which is born of an overweening and haughty estimate of your SUPERIORITY to all of them. 1 Tim. 2:3-8 and 2 Pet. 3:9 are not the only scriptures which you use to justify your heresy, and end up defeating it. There is more to come, much more!
Though he later goes astray on this text, Doggieduff is the only one who has come close to the truth. In post 55 on this thread, he states accurately the Boule is both His counsel and his determined purpose. I have not even begun to cite the MANY verses which show that when spoken of in other scriptures, boule, or its counterpart in the OT, is used of that will of his which is neverfailing in its execution.
And when I dare state my doubt of your SUPERIORITY in the scripture translation, he calls that an "idiotic statement." My, how you junior theologians safegaurd your (ha, ha) SUPERIORITY!

 

[godrulz]

There is certainly evidence in every translation of doctrinal bias in some verses. e.g. RSV liberal theology (water down virgin birth in Is. 7:14...young woman vs virgin); JW/WT and Deity passages; Jerusalem Bible with Catholic doctrinal bent/bias; Living Bible (Baptist= Taylor) is anti-charismatic in some verses; Calvinistic influence in verses in many translations since this is a predominant system held by many translators represented on a mixed committee).

There is value in Greek grammatical studies to clarify controversial nuances in English translations that differ. Textual criticism is also necessary to decide between MSS. Few of us are experts...a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing...we cannot just compare 2 uses of a word...context, etc. must be weighed.

A simplistic English reading in one translation does not ensure proper understanding on some 'non-essential' verses (i.e. major, essential doctrinal truth is not disputed between credible translations).

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Godrulz--There are MANY Bible chapters which deal mostly with other matters, yet have clear messianic prophecies set within them like diamonds. The content of Genesis 3, Isa. chapters 9,11, Psalm 89, 2, etc, etc, etc.
Therefore your objection that Proverbs is wisdom literature has no standing. As we say in Texas, "that old dog won't hunt."

Your attempt to link the Calvinist's view of Proverbs with the JWs
is faulty. Christ is the Wisdom of God as expressed in the covenant struck before the foundation of the world. He has many names according to His many sufficiencies. Concerning Wisdom, read 1 Cor 1:30--"But of Him are you in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God..." Don't overlook that "of HIM are you in
Christ Jesus." Of HIM (not of ourselves--it is God who makes men to differ). Read on to the 2nd chapter, verse 7 "But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom WHICH GOD PREDETERMINED BEFORE THE AGES FOR OUR GLORY." (caps mine)
Not in His personal being, which is coeternal with the existence of the Father and the Spirit, but as the Wisdom of God, He was "brought forth" in the covenant of redemption--"according as He has chosen us in Him before the foundation of of the world." (Eph. 1:4) Therefore, the Arminian attempt to muddy the waters in Proverbs eight by making a false accusation against the Reformed view of that chapter by linking it to the JW heresy is a misrepresentation. The JWs think it refers to His being. The Reformed people know it refers to the bringing forth of Christ as the federal head of His people in the Covenant of Redemption.
Concerning federl ead--as an aside, I mention that the meaning of Christ's position as the head of the church is ANOTHER Bible truth which utterly destroys the Arminian heresy. See Romans 5, Eph. 1, and 1 Cor. 15:22, 45-47
By your objection that Proverbs is wisdom literature, do you mean thereby to discount the validity of its words in speaking of Christ, do you mean to say that there are no prophecies of Christ in all the wisdom literature?

 

[GodsfreeWill]

Originally posted by Rolf Ernst

Amazing how arrogant you Arminians are. Each of you esteems himself a better translator of Scripture than those who have poured their whole lives into textual accuracy;

Who has poured their whole life into textual accuracy? Do you know these translators personally?

but when their translations show your God dishonoring doctrines to be a lie, you think you can "translate" your way out of that.

Wrong. The order is actually reversed. My beliefs come from the accurate translation. That's why I'm not a calvinist.

As for those who refer to"calvinistic" interpreters--if you knew anything about the care taken in translating the various versions, you would know that these translations are not done by one individual, nor by men of only one doctrinal persuasion. They are agreed upon by men of differing theological persuasions

Wait, are you sure about this? You act as if you know the translators and know their background in education. I would trust someone whose greek knowledge came from the teachings of Wallace, much more than someone who's greek teaching came from, say Moulton. I have a sneaky suspicion you don't have the slightest bit of understanding of greek.

and guess what--none of them have seen fit to use YOUR makeshift evasion of the real meaning of 2 Pet. 3:9, which is born of an overweening and haughty estimate of your SUPERIORITY to all of them. 1 Tim. 2:3-8 and 2 Pet. 3:9 are not the only scriptures which you use to justify your heresy, and end up defeating it. There is more to come, much more!

The majority text agrees with our translation. That's probably the most accurate text of scripture we have today.

Though he later goes astray on this text, Doggieduff is the only one who has come close to the truth. In post 55 on this thread, he states accurately the Boule is both His counsel and his determined purpose. I have not even begun to cite the MANY verses which show that when spoken of in other scriptures, boule, or its counterpart in the OT, is used of that will of his which is neverfailing in its execution.
And when I dare state my doubt of your SUPERIORITY in the scripture translation, he calls that an "idiotic statement." My, how you junior theologians safegaurd your (ha, ha) SUPERIORITY!

You still didn't answer my question. (Which I'm beginning to notice happens rather frequently with you.) According to calvinism, God counsels EVRYTHING. He determines EVERYTHING. He predetermines EVERYTHING. If that's true, then 2 Peter 3:9 is not, because it clearly states that God DOES NOT COUNSEL something. How are you going to dance around this one?

 

[Rolf Ernst]

Doggieduff--I am not dancing around anything. It takes much more time to respond to and correct the errors of others than to just wail and make charges, so you be patient.
Concerning your post above, Yes, He does work ALL things after the counsel of His own will. (Eph 1:4.) Concerning all things, His determinate counsel, predetermination is involved.

Your saying, "...it clearly states that God does not counsel something" is an example of that being fulfilled precisely. Can you follow THIS??

What is NOT counseled is that any of those of whom the apostle is speaking "should perish." And accordingly, they DON'T. They don't
because He did not counsel that they should perish! But He DID counsel that all of them should come to repentance. And they do, fulfilling the purpose of His longsuffering.

The Arminian understanding of the text, as they love to use it, is that God doesn't want any single individual of mankind to perish. That understanding defies the most rudimentary processes of thought BECAUSE the longer He delays His return in judgment, the more there are who DO perish.

The only realistic understanding of this text is that the apostle is speaking of an "elect" number whom He is longsuffering toward, an "elect" number whom He is not willing that they should perish, but come to repentance. That is the ONLY understanding which is in full accord with the entire text. The Arminian understanding would have God deliberately taking, by His longsuffering, a measure which is continually self-defeating.

Again, the fact that He does not counsel that any should perish
is not in any way a reasdon for you to triumphantly say, "see, that proves that He does NOT counsel everything."

Snort! Of course not, doggieduff. Why would he counsel that to which His will is contrary?? He doesn't counsel it and, accordingly, it does not happen. But He DOES counsel that they all come to repentance, and they DO.