Whosoever in John 3:16.

Bob Jones V said:
"You dodged me." As though you think I am scared of you? Get off your high horse. Years ago I read John MacArthur's TEh Gospel According to Jesus" And it cured me of the idea that there are "Carnal" Christians. Here is an article that gets pretty close to what I see in 1 Cor 3. https://banneroftruth.org/us/resources/articles/2002/are-there-carnal-christians/
Click to expand...
A flawed man's interpretation of Scripture. I don't take Grahams or MacArthurs opinion as Bible. Sorry...just doesn't cut it. And, your opinion matters very little to many here....
 
Leatherneck0311 said:
Scripture explains how a Christian is supposed to act and I see very little of that here, but then again Calvinist follow their hero calvin.
Click to expand...
I take it you're a painter instead of a Marine because you seem to paint with a pretty broad brush! Maybe you sucked up too many chemicals in that plant! LOL
 
Ransom said:
Is falsely accusing people of homosexuality how Scripture says a Christian is supposed to act?
Click to expand...
I don't think Lacepanties0311 can answer that realistically, Scott. He's not only accused people of being homosexual but continues to grill people about "sodomy." With this obsession, I'd say he MIGHT BE...and notice, I said, MIGHT BE speaking from experience.
 
Bob Jones V said:
"You dodged me." As though you think I am scared of you? Get off your high horse. Years ago I read John MacArthur's TEh Gospel According to Jesus" And it cured me of the idea that there are "Carnal" Christians. Here is an article that gets pretty close to what I see in 1 Cor 3. https://banneroftruth.org/us/resources/articles/2002/are-there-carnal-christians/
Click to expand...
I never said anything about you being afraid of me. That seems to be you projecting on to me. What I said was you dodged me and you did. Just like you did again for the 3rd time with that recent link. Could you point to where that article says that first Corinthians 3:3 is dealing with lost people? You can just simply admit that you were wrong about the verse referencing the Corinthians as lost people and I'll leave this alone, or keep digging the hole that you are in and proving that what I said originally is true that you have a theological bias and it is forced upon the text when you interpret things.
 
voicecrying said:
I have seen at least a few times that in 1 John 1:3 the phrase "that you too may have fellowship with us" indicates that John was initially addressing the lost before moving on to address the believers.
Click to expand...
That is interesting take on the verse which I never thought about it before. After further consideration I still reject that interpretation due to the explicitly clear theme and context of the entirety of the 3 books written by John (and the immediate context that John is writing to fellow believers attempting to persuade them to not be drawn into gnosticism In order that they might have fellowship one with another).
 
AverageJoe said:
Hey Lacepanties...I thought you were going to leave this "snake pit!" Guess you're the snake from the Garden of Eden, eh?
Click to expand...
Can we please try to keep it civil, we have new members visiting with us today.

Maybe you could shake a visitors hand or invite them to your home for dinner.

Attendance is down, offerings are down, new memberships are down, have you all forgotten the bottom line, it's all about the numbers.
 
Bob Jones V said:
You said point me to someone who holds that. I did. Shut your pie hole, big mouth.
Click to expand...
No, I didn't say point to somebody that holds that, whatever that means, oh slippery one. I asked you to provide some reputable source that claimed (as you originally claimed) that 1st Corinthians 3:3 is referring to lost people. You still haven't done that. I asked you after you posted that link to banner of truth, which supposedly supports your claim, if you could point me to where in the link it says something about 1 Corinthians 3:3 referred to the Lost. Your credibility is slipping for everybody who is reading this forum.
 
sword said:
1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Click to expand...
Interesting thing about 1 John. It probably wasn't the first thing John wrote; his Gospel came first by several years. At the end of chapter 11, the Pharisees and the priests are plotting how to bring about the death of Jesus:

Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, "You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish." He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. So from that day on they made plans to put him to death. (John 11:49-53)​

But note the parallelism between John 11:51-52 and 1 John 2:2:

John 11:521 John 2:2
He prophesied that Jesus would die for the nationHe is the propitiation for our sin
and not for the nation onlyand not for ours only
but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroadbut also for the sins of the whole world

It's not unrealistic to think the recipients of John's letter were already familiar with John's gospel, and that his choice of words in the letter is deliberately calling to mind what he had written earlier. If we let Scripture interpret Scripture, then, "the whole world" is parallel to "the children of God who are scattered abroad."

In other words, Jesus is the propitiation, not for "us" (the Israelites who believed), but also the "whole world" (other Christians scattered throughout the world). After all, there is no propitiation for unbelievers. The wrath of God remains upon them (Romans 1:18).
 
Bob Jones V said:
you obviously didn;t read the linked article because that is what it says.
Click to expand...
Don't be so lazy Bob, go ahead and take another shovel of dirt unto your credibility's burial. Cite the specific portion of your link and what you think banneroftruth is saying that supports your claim. I'll wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top