Especially=

[70sevens]

[Isa 29:8]
as when a hungry man dreams that he is eating, but he awakens, and his hunger remains;
as when a thirsty man dreams that he is drinking, but he awakens faint, with his thirst unquenched.
So will it be with the hordes of all the nations that fight against Mount Zion.


Very curious.
Can a man have a full stomach with the-pie-in-the-sky?

[Peacetroll]

70 sevens...

Your real problem is in your definition of 'mankind' and 'man'.

Are we not told to build precept on precept??  If you consider a 'man' to simply mean a homo-sapien is this a good 'spiritual' therefore scriptural understanding in your opinion???

Do  you consider all homo-sapiens 'men' and 'alive'??!!!, when this is not the case when we approach scripture from a spritual standpoint.

If you define 'man' and 'mankind' in all scriptures as simply and literally 'homo-sapien kind' then you are right.  But I firmly believe there is a deeper, spiritual and more unostensible definition that slips by the majority of scripture readers.

If the spiritual definition is more important, and IF the spiritual definition of 'man' or 'mankind' is specifically those who have spirits from the true God (and it is evident by their fruits), then I am correct.

For a true man is one who believes in Christ and/or the Love of God and it has nothing to do with your testicles nor your flesh and blood make-up.

Another point that nobody wants to discuss is the wide-sweeping generalization of 'all men' in context to other scriptures by Paul.  Paul uses 'all men' many times in his epistles and in the others he never ever literally means all homo-sapiens on earth.

I just wish you would think earnestly instead of defending such a 'swiss cheese' philosophy.  I too loved that cheese for years, it was an easy understanding to ensconce into, and I also became irrate when others pointed out flaws and fallacies between my 'cheese' and scripture.

As long as you believe the darkness can be converted and saved you will lose out on the true happening going on, the division of the light (spiritually) from the darkness (spiritually).

Genesis 1:4
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

Genesis 1:6
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters (peoples) from the waters (peoples).

Luke 12:51
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

Luke 12:52
For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

John 10:19
There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.

Acts 14:4
But the multitude of the city was divided: and part held with the Jews, and part with the apostles.

Matthew 25:32
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

[JillieRose]

Peacetroll, love, you do yourself no favours by moving from topic to topic. It's very confusing, and I don't know what you're arguing for, or against, or...anything. I thought the thread was on the use of malista, and on when all means 'absolutely everybody', and when it means 'all kinds'.

But everyone seems to be having a different argument now, so I'm lost.

Help, please? I'm confuzzled.

[SeekerSA]

Jillie

Believe me you are not the only one that is confused.  I have addressed his bible hopscotch before and cherry picking. 

Peacetroll is not a very good apologist.  Maybe the number of texts quoted or posts posted in proportion to rebuttals is the way one must reinforce their credibility while avoiding rebuttals and refusing to answer questions.

He wanders so quickly off topic and even when he gets allies, he attacks him/them too  :laugh: :LH: :pointlaugh:

70sevens does not believe in UR either.

Eric you outdid yourself this time  :LH: :mrflo:

Blessings

Well we can at least get entertainment value here.

[FineLinen]

But hey, I'm just a backward cherry picker so why give me any courtesy??

Backward: do not quit your picking career!  :laughing7:

Again I will ask you to define what "especially" means in all English dictionaries. Does especially mean only or exclusively? And again does the Koine Greek malista mean only or exclusively?

Only= monon/ monos

Especially= malista

"He is the Mercy-Seat for our sins, and not for our sins only/ monon/ monos, but for the sins of the whole ungodly multitude.

Plan b minus=

He is the Mercy-Seat for our sins, and for our sins ONLY, and not for the sins of the whole ungodly multitude.

[jabcat]

It seems to me, many points on both sides are being made that are true/have truth in them.  What strikes me is that to say "Jesus is going to save all", or on the other hand, "many will be judged", are not exclusive statements.  In my humble, still learning opinion, is it possible Jesus will save all eventually, some now, many later, but as Fine Linen alluded to wrt to the second death, the judgment that will occur is the next step in the salvation of all?  I don't see scripture saying "appointed to die, after that the judgment, God's done".  I see more happening, i.e., the gates of the new city open as the Kings of the earth bring the nations in, the leaves of the Tree of Life for the healing of the nations, etc...  Isn't that what orthodoxy and denominations do, limit God to their own little box and set of beliefs, then being unwilling to hear others who may have more revelation/understanding that we could all learn from?  I may be wrong, but this is IMO, as I understand right now.  God's blessing to all...P.S., believers, especially, are bro's and sis's..."in love, preferring one another".

[Craig]

That is why it needs to be understood, not ALL salvation is the SAME salvation mentioned in Scripture.

[70sevens]

Time will come
when we realize that "Gate of the new city open...,
leaves of the tree of Life for healing of..."
are things to be accomplished within us in this life.
When our old selves die on the cross,
we will see new Jerusalem descending from heaven inside of us.

The scripture says only one salvation by Jesus.
That's the purpose of the Scripture from the begining.
So in reading scripture, beware of salvation by a fluke.

[Craig]

The scripture says only one salvation by Jesus.
That's the purpose of the Scripture from the begining.
So in reading scripture, beware of salvation by a fluke.

This is called again, a hasty generalization. You think all salvation is the same. The end result will be God is all in all, that is all mankind. So therefore when you see some being saved, and some not, that doesn't mean not all mankind, that means the salvation being described is not the same salvation as the end result which is found in Christ Jesus, the one and only Salvation.

You don't have to be so ambigious, I know what you were responding to.

[jabcat]

That is why it needs to be understood, not ALL salvation is the SAME salvation mentioned in Scripture.

SOTW, you posted while I was typing this, but I think it still fits and we are basically in agreement.

The scripture says only one salvation by Jesus.
That's the purpose of the Scripture from the begining.
So in reading scripture, beware of salvation by a fluke.

Jesus is the salvation...the "Author and Finisher of our faith".  But to say "I know exactly the way and time He'll accomplish it" may be closing ourselves to Him giving us further understanding as He chooses to reveal to us. His life, cross, death, resurrection, etc., as I understand it right now, are the clearly laid-out tenets of the faith.  However, to say "the only way He'll work is X,Y,Z and cannot include" His workings during the millinium, how He brings Israel to knowledge of His being the Messiah so that "all Israel shall be saved", how and when He works the circumstances and reveals Himself so that "every knee will bow, every tongue confess [proclaim with joy]", which is apparently not in this lifetime... I'm just not sure we can limit Him to only the way/timing we understand it and take a dogmatic stance to the point of dividing. As far as "by a fluke", I take that to mean by accident.  When Jesus knocks on anyone's door, gives us the grace and strength to believe and open that door, that's no accident at all.  He is seeking and saving that which is lost.   

[Reverend G]

The idea that ALL men does not mean all of mankind is seemingly laid waste in that scripture, isn't it?  So salvation will come to all (who believe in Him), and ESPECIALLY to all (who really believe)? So now we have 3 divisions, unbelievers who are lost, believers, and then true believers? 

[arcticmonster2003]

quote Reverend G

The idea that ALL men does not mean all of mankind is seemingly laid waste in that scripture, isn't it?  So salvation will come to all (who believe in Him), and ESPECIALLY to all (who really believe)? So now we have 3 divisions, unbelievers who are lost, believers, and then true believers? 

I loved these questions, especially the part about ESPECIALLY.

[Reverend G]

I guess if you are trying to plea the case that "my denomination is better than yours" then seeing it that way really is helpful.

[arcticmonster2003]

I must admit that I do not understand what you mean. I just loved the questions, especially one specific part of your questions.

(ok, ok, maybe I was offering another example of the word especially) :bigGrin:

[70sevens]

The scripture says only one salvation by Jesus.
That's the purpose of the Scripture from the begining.
So in reading scripture, beware of salvation by a fluke.

This is called again, a hasty generalization. You think all salvation is the same. The end result will be God is all in all, that is all mankind. So therefore when you see some being saved, and some not, that doesn't mean not all mankind, that means the salvation being described is not the same salvation as the end result which is found in Christ Jesus, the one and only Salvation.

You don't have to be so ambigious, I know what you were responding to.

You said "not ALL salvation is the SAME salvation mentioned in Scripture."

Really, you construe the salvations in many different meanings.

So far I found 4,
let me recap for you.
Correct me if I am wrong as they are your definitions.

1) Salvation - some being saved, some not

[1Ti 4:10]
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach,
because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men,
specially of those that believe.

2) Salvation - some kind of trouble-shooting

[1Ti 4:16]
Watch your life and doctrine closely.
Persevere in them, because if you do,
you will save both yourself and your hearers.

3) Salvation - by fluke

In fact, this salvation rescinds all the scriptures, Jesus, God,
even the word salvation itself.   
Please tell me if you think otherwise.

4) Salvation - all in all, end result

You said this salvation is different from salvation 1) above.
Keen to know how is it different specifically?

[70sevens]

Hi Jabcat,

God has given the scripture to save 'Me' who is now here.
Really hope that we can focus on our own salvation,
rather than focusing on Israelites and the people after life.

[Joh 21:22] Jesus said to him, "If I want him to remain until I come,
what [is that] to you? You follow Me!"

As for the salvation by fluke, please refer to the post titled
"Let's ask Jesus the question 'Will few be saved?'" in this board.

God bless.

[Peacetroll]

Again I will ask you to define what "especially" means in all English dictionaries. Does especially mean only or exclusively? And again does the Koine Greek malista mean only or exclusively?

Finelinen.  If you would have read the previous threads you will see (on page one), that I give multiple definitions of malista and it honestly depends on the context like so many words and languages do.  Malista can mean many things.  'specially'...'particularly'...'in other words'.....'especially'.....so I'm not sure what your digging for.

I'm just pointing out the obvious fact that it makes no sense to say someone is 'especially' saved, and that is basically what one is saying when they say 'all men are saved, especially those that believe' in my opinion.

And the greater fallacies I have been pointing out, but all falls on deaf ears.  Paul utilizes the phrase 'all men' in other scriptures but he NEVER literally means 'all men and women on earth forever',............so my simple observation is this.......why do you choose to consider Pauls 'all men' to be literal in 1 Timothy 4:10 and yet he never means it literally ANY where else???

Then I jumped to the point that you must understand the idea or precept or definition of 'man' in a spiritual sense instead of the common earthy definition of man.

Truth and Peace in JEsus Christ, all others are liars.

I'm just asking some of you to consider Christ' words with more weight then all others, something I did'nt use to do, but since I have it's clarified so much (at least for me), and now I understand the importance of believing in Christ through thick or thin and trying my best to treat others with mercy and justice.

[Sarah]

I'm just pointing out the obvious fact that it makes no sense to say someone is 'especially' saved, and that is basically what one is saying when they say 'all men are saved, especially those that believe' in my opinion.

Think about this....

5 people where pulled from a burning building.  3 of the people had 3rd degree burns over 90% of their body.  2 people came out completely unscathed as they smelled the smoke early.  All 5 were saved from death, but the 2 were especially saved because their bodies were preserved.

What if love, joy, and peace in the Holy Spirit were 'being saved' but it was a land far, far away...and someone said you could acess it now by believing?  And what if you did not believe, and took the long, long journey...well eventually you would get there.  But what if you believed now and got their sooner.  Wouldn't you be 'especailly' saved?

I am 'especially' saved because I see Jesus now and my quality of life is well...better.

I don't understand what is so difficult about this.   :dontknow:

[Peacetroll]

There will be no more pain in the Kingdom of God.

So your analogy concerning 'burnt' people is without merit.

For their will be no pain, no death, no deformed, no liars, no murderers,...all made perfect IN CHRIST.

Revelation 21:4
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

No burnt.  No lame.  No deformed.  No partially saved folks running about.

And as for those who believe in Christ, what 'bliss' do you speak of?  Yes we have a hope of things to come, but there is no peace nor joy in the valley of death for those in Christ.....except that looking forward to things to come...

1 Corinthians 15:19
If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

Paul didn't make them sound too satisfied did he?

Hebrews 11

35Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:

36And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:

37They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

38(Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

No, I see not blissful heaven on earth for true believers at all.  Contrary to orthodox preachers teachings...

Matthew 10:16
Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Being a 'sheep among wolves' dont sound like no heaven to me.

At any rate.  Carry on.

[JillieRose]

Malista can mean many things.  'specially'...'particularly'...'in other words'.....'especially'.....so I'm not sure what your digging for.

You have not yet proved to anyone's satisfaction, other than perhaps your own, that malista ever means 'in other words'.

Give us something concrete here, and we can work with it.

Also, specially and especially are practically indistinguishable in meaning. Particularly is slightly different. But not hugely. 'In other words' is a huge departure from the Strong's meaning of the word, among others.

There will be no more pain in the Kingdom of God.
So your analogy concerning 'burnt' people is without merit.

It is an analogy, and by definition is not perfect. Do you understand the point she is making?

If not, I shall put it another way. (if I am misrepresenting you, Sarah, my apologies)

"those who become Christians now, in this life, receive blessings in this life (and possibly in the age to come, I don't know if you extended it this far, Sarah) which people who are not Christians do not get. All are saved by Jesus eventually, but especially Christians who get something extra: including but not limited to:
- knowing God's love now
- joy
- the peace that passes understanding
- The Holy Spirit with us in our lives
- the power of God working in us and through us"

Do you understand the argument being made now?

[Peacetroll]

Go to page one for my explanation of 'malista' the greek term as I've requested so many times before, please.  So im not being redundant.  Ah, here is at least a clip from page 1.

μαλιστα  adverb
malista  mal'-is-tah:  (adverbially) most (in the greatest degree) or particularly -- chiefly, most of all, (e-)specially.

As for the analogy given, one is either saved from the second death or not.  Your analogy is still worthless (no offense seriously).

I've made the following point about 4 times.  But it's always dodged.  Answer IF YOU WILL.

Why do you take Paul literal as you do in 1 Timothy 4:10 when Paul was not literal when he said "all Men" in so many of his other epistles??

Who will tell me why you use 'all men' literally in 1 Timothy 4:10 and not in Pauls other writtings?  Any chance that its conveniant?

And what about the spiritual definition of 'man' that keeps being dodged.  Ah, I see this is too much deep critical thinking for some of you.  But its not your faults. 

Everything according to God's plan.

[laren]

Go to page one for my explanation of 'malista' the greek term as I've requested so many times before, please.  So im not being redundant. 

As for the analogy given, one is either saved from the second death or not.  Your analogy is still worthless (no offense seriously).

I've made the following point about 4 times.  But it's always dodged.  Answer IF YOU WILL.

Why do you take Paul literal as you do in 1 Timothy 4:10 when Paul was not literal when he said "all Men" in so many of his other epistles??

Who will tell me why you use 'all men' literally in 1 Timothy 4:10 and not in Pauls other writtings?

I personally have no problem seeing that those with faith are saved from second death (or not hurt of it), and those without faith (eyes to see, ears to hear) suffer second death and are not saved from it. 

Only Noah and his family were saved, the rest were destroyed in the "fire".


Where I believe I differ, is that I believe the "fire of second death" is not annihilation (sp?) of the person, but annihilation of the "self works, old covenant belief". 

I believe LOVE covers all sins, and that the finished work of Jesus on the cross proved the father loves all. 

Those without faith are enemies to those with faith, but "BELOVED" for the fathers sakes. 

I believe salvation comes through destruction for those without faith. 

 

[Craig]

Really, you construe the salvations in many different meanings.

No I don't. Not all salvations are the same, but in the end all mankind is saved in Christ Jesus. It is very simple.

The man who built with gold, silver and precious gems versus the man who built with wood, hay and stubble, but are saved in the end. However, when the fire went through, the man who built with good material was untouched he was saved the pain of loss; while the man who built with poor materials lost everything but is saved as one through fire.

The man who is obedient is saved from disipline; the man who is disobedient is not saved from displine, but the end result of righteousness is the same.

The man who trusts in the information given to him is accurate when it is, is saved the work of trying to do something himself which has already been proven by others; yet, the end result is the same.

Unlike some, I am not simple minded or foolish to make hasty generalizations or commit the either/or fallacies which so many who cannot see the bigger picture ever understand.

Proverbs 8:5
You who are simple, gain prudence; you who are foolish, gain understanding.

Whether you enter the narrow or wide gate, they all lead into the city of salvation. However, depending on the gate you took, will you have gotten there through life or destruction.

Hebrews 11:32-35
And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets, who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.

Some are saved this life, some are not saved this life. Some are healed (salvation) some are not healed. Etc. These all mean salvation in some sort and in some manner, and not all salvations described in Scripture all mean the same salvation. The only conclusion however, is all will recieve the final and lasting Salvation, which comes only through and in Jesus Christ; when God is all in all.

[laren]

Really, you construe the salvations in many different meanings.

No I don't. Not all salvations are the same, but in the end all mankind is saved in Christ Jesus. It is very simple.

The man who built with gold, silver and precious gems versus the man who built with wood, hay and stubble, but are saved in the end. However, when the fire went through, the man who built with good material was untouched he was saved the pain of loss; while the man who built with poor materials lost everything but is saved as one through fire.

The man who is obedient is saved from disipline; the man who is disobedient is not saved from displine, but the end result of righteousness is the same.

The man who trusts in the information given to him is accurate when it is, is saved the work of trying to do something himself which has already been proven by others; yet, the end result is the same.

Unlike some, I am not simple minded or foolish to make hasty generalizations or commit the either/or fallacies which so many who cannot see the bigger picture ever understand.

Proverbs 8:5
You who are simple, gain prudence; you who are foolish, gain understanding.

Whether you enter the narrow or wide gate, they all lead into the city of salvation. However, depending on the gate you took, will you have gotten there through life or destruction.

Hebrews 11:32-35
And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel and the prophets, who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions, quenched the fury of the flames, and escaped the edge of the sword; whose weakness was turned to strength; and who became powerful in battle and routed foreign armies. Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.

Some are saved this life, some are not saved this life. Some are healed (salvation) some are not healed. Etc. These all mean salvation in some sort and in some manner, and not all salvations described in Scripture all mean the same salvation. The only conclusion however, is all will recieve the final and lasting Salvation, which comes only through and in Jesus Christ; when God is all in all.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[jabcat]

Hi Jabcat,

God has given the scripture to save 'Me' who is now here.
Really hope that we can focus on our own salvation,
rather than focusing on Israelites and the people after life.

I question this, 70.  What's your purpose now of not wanting to discuss others, especially?  It seems to me those are good points of discussion, because the whole point of this post is "especially", and the very context itself includes a wide array of individuals/groups...if it's about you only, then there's really not much need for most of this discussion.  Seems to me we're trying to understand God's character and that's about us all, including you, me, Noah, and Lot's wife :Peace:.

The man who built with gold, silver and precious gems versus the man who built with wood, hay and stubble, but are saved in the end. However, when the fire went through, the man who built with good material was untouched he was saved the pain of loss; while the man who built with poor materials lost everything but is saved as one through fire.

The man who is obedient is saved from disipline; the man who is disobedient is not saved from displine, but the end result of righteousness is the same.

Whether you enter the narrow or wide gate, they all lead into the city of salvation. However, depending on the gate you took, will you have gotten there through life or destruction.

Amen!