1 Timoth 4.10 is the Best Vese to Destroy Calvinism

[Parture]

1 Tim. 4.10 says "God is the Savior of all men, specially those who believe."

Christians interpret this to mean God provides the opportunity for salvation to everyone (unlimited atonement), since Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the whole world. Therefore, it is specially those who believe because they receive salvation/regeneration.

This verse does not make much sense the way Calvinists read it in their various interpretations.

1) They say "God is the Savior of all [kinds of] men [from different places], specially those believe."

If God is the Savior of all kinds of men in different places, wouldn't that be nonsensically redundant to then follow up by saying "specially those who believe," for obviously all those that would be saved would believe?

2) Other Calvinists say this verse means: "God is the Savior of all men [by faith], specially those who believe."

But isn't that equally problematic since being the Savior of all men by faith, specially those who believe is again nonsensically redundant, since obviously those who have faith are saved and believe? And who are these "all men"? Are they just some men from different places? If not, then why are not all people saved? Moreover, who are these others who don't believe who would be saved? Is Calvinism ecumenical?

3) Calvinists can't seem to agree on how they interpret this verse. They are confused. Still another class of Calvinists believe this verse means "God is the Savior of all men [by giving them breath], specially those who believe."

But the error there is why would a God save a person only by allowing them to exist, rather than saving them to the uttermost? What love is that? And never do we find in Scripture existence should be equated with being saved by a Savior. Salvation is beyond just existing.

4) Still other Calvinists try to change "specially" to be "particularly" or "specifically" but that still produces the same nonsensical redundancy.

[Parture]

Centuries ago, the Calvinist such as John Calvin if he didn't outright kill the Christian would kick the Christian out of town. But if the Christian returned, and still wasn't killed, nor banished again, he would be ostracized for speaking up about the truth. How unrighteous!

Yet the burden of the proof remains on the Calvinist to deal with this evidence in the opening post. Even today this condition persists, because if you spoke up against Calvinism in a Calvinist group setting, you would not last long I assure you. Is that any way to treat a Christian by banishing him for life?

Sadly, the Calvinist does not address these problems such as that posed by 1 Timothy 4:40 and misread by Calvinists. This is the nature of ceding ground to demonic possession by shutting one's mind down when confronted with a problem. This is how all cults operate, because in the end they have to shut their minds down to their immoral behavior and logical fallacies.

[Parture]

Re: simplelife @ CARM


No, if you use the term "specifically" then the problem goes away, so you are mistaken. The meaning then becomes, "God is the saviour of all kinds of men, to be very specific, he is the saviour of all who believe"

So then there would be no redundancy, only further clarity of meaning.

"Specially" in the lexicon is "malista" which very clearly means "especially, chiefly, most of all, above all" and not particularly or specifically. Therefore, trying to insert a clarification rather than a subset is totally altering the meaning of word "specially" we know very well in the English language. "Above all" is quite unlike "specifically" or "particularly".

Too much violence is done to the Scripture in the Calvinistic way, both in the first half and the second half of the sentence. "All men" is not all men, for the love is just not there to do so, and "especially" is just a clarification, not a special group at all.

In conclusion, when the Calvinist can't fit in his interpretation through a multitude of insertions rather than the simple and plain reading, he will resort to drastically changing the meaning of words.

[Parture]

Well, you claimed that "specifically" lead to the same contradiction. You are wrong. If you want to claim that the greek cannot mean that, then that is a different issue. Get your facts straight.
You've, nonetheless, avoided the problem that there is no justification anywhere to be found to change the word "specially" into "specifically" which renders Calvinism just as false as it ever was.

"God is the Savior of all men, [specifically] those who believe" remains nonsensically redundant if you don't mess with the first half of the sentence where "all men" are "all men" Jesus died on the cross for. But if you mess with both halves of the sentence, it only shows you can alter any sentence in the Bible to mean anything you want it to me.

Furthermore, God saves (regenerates) those who believe. It doesn't say "God is the Savior of all men, specially those who [were regenerated to] believe". So much violence is needed to interpret it your way. So you can see no matter how you try to alter it, it remains nonsensically redundant.