[xzins]

The word receive means "permit entrance." It's volitional. It's invitational.

There is no scripture mentioned by Jean Chauvin that can't be fit into an arminian paradigm.

Those kind of arguments simply are not what has turned my head on this subject. It is the issue of predestination and time.

[drstevej]

Make that fourty lashes RECEIVED.

***Those kind of arguments simply are not what has turned my head on this subject. It is the issue of predestination and time.***

Keep turning, you're not done yet.

[Jean Chauvin]

"The word receive means "permit entrance.""

Can you please give us the reference from which you cite? (Or did you just make this up?)

Furthermore, if that indeed came from an accepted authroity, is it the ~ONLY~ accepted definition from that authority.

In other words, while drstevej and I acknowledge that "receive" can be voitional, we also have given you many examples where "receive" is most definately not voitional, invitational, or permitted.

In opposition to this, you are contending that "receive" can ~ONLY~ be defined as "voitional", "invitational" or "permitted" entrance. Does your authority define "receive" as ONLY voitional?

Jean

[Jean Chauvin]

"There is no scripture mentioned by Jean Chauvin that can't be fit into an arminian paradigm."

This one needs to be twisted quite a bit:

Acts 13
48 When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

Somehow, the Arminians make this "and all who appointed themsleves for eternal life believed."

But, as I have repeatedly pointed out, they need to change things around substantially to make it, as you say, "fit".

Jean