Johnny Varghese. Touché, what you have said, proves that Poonen is wrong when he said the word “tribulation” never once appears in the Old Testament which makes it a new covenant word.

Also, NT quotations of OT verses help provide equivalent Greek words for Hebrew words.

Let us begin with “My own take on free-will is that man is free to exercise his will within the constraints that are placed upon it.”

Any constraint or limitation on free-will is not free-will. You cannot say to someone, you are free to choose whatever and however you wish, but you must choose within the parameters I have set for you. What kind of constraints are there in the choice between “life” and “death?” Would you, if you had been God, say to someone, “Listen up, you varmints, you have a choice between drinking a cool-aid or poison but you must choose poison because I have ordained you to do so.”?

How could I have known you are a man? Many people whom I have debated on the internet like to write their names in capital letters. I also do not know how many other factors, other than a mutual love and her superlative spiritual attributes, you had to take into consideration before you decided to marry her. However, does she know about your “many factors” choice camaraderie? It is my humble opinion that she would have been ghastly disappointed if she had known that love was not the only factor that led you to tie the knot. Why do I say so? Well, wherever God says “love one another” He never meant that we should first make a list of factors and then tick them off one by one until we are satisfied that all of them are perfectly united in others. How boring can you get?

Your reference to the “natural man” in 1 Corinthians 2:14 is so typical Calvinistic. Paul says, “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” (Romans 10:17). Are you suggesting that the natural (unsaved) man is unable to understand salvation by hearing the Word of God and that only the spiritual man has that ability? Jesus Christ said that unless we believe like a child, we cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That, to me, proves that even a child can understand and believe the elementary principle of salvation. No, the “things” in 1 Corinthians 2:10 are the “deep things” of God which, obviously only a born-again, spirit-filled believer can understand.

Therefore, I maintain that your comparison between “Christ’s victory” on the cross and man’s “free-will,” to prove that free-will is a misnomer, is inappropriate’.

‘Your effort to draw a comparison between “Christ’s victory” and man’s “free-will,” to prove that free-will is a misnomer, is inappropriate’.

I had hoped that it would be a straightforward line of enquiry rather than an attempt to present an iron clad proof that free-will is a misnomer. Anyway, I am concluding from your response that you regard my assessment as unfair, or inappropriate if you prefer.

‘Do you really think God would have given them this choice if they had no free-will?’

It is difficult to me to see that because God presented the nation with choices that it had an innate ability to make the right ones. The record of Israel’s poor choices and the attending consequences is fairly impressive in spite of the people’s affirmation ‘All that the LORD hath spoken we will do’.

‘If salvation were dependent on the election, predestination, and foreordination of free-will-less zombies who cannot understand, respond, and believe the Gospel of their own accord, Christ’s victory would have been a complete failure’.

By ‘believe the Gospel of their own accord’ are you suggesting that man does have some innate ability to believe the Gospel? Can the natural man receive the things of the Spirit even though they are foolishness unto him, can he know them when the scriptures assert he cannot because they are spiritually discerned? Can those in the flesh who cannot please God exercise faith without which it is impossible to please Him?

‘Are you married? Assuming you are, did your husband force you to marry him, or did you choose to marry him because you love him? If love was the deciding factor in your decision to get married, why do you doubt God’s integrity to grant his creatures the same kind of choice, or do you believe as do the Calvinists that He unconditionally clobbers his elect over their heads and then limitedly drags them to his den like the ancient barbarians?’

I couldn’t resist a smile when I read this. I am a man, not a woman. PAM is an acronym comprising the initials of my full name (Phillip Alexander Millar). It’s easier for me than stating my full name.

There were many factors in my decision to marry my wife including, but not limited to, love and her superlative spiritual characteristics. Anyway, I do not believe that ‘He unconditionally clobbers his elect over their heads and then limitedly drags them to his den like the ancient barbarians?’

My own take on free-will is that man is free to exercise his will within the constraints that are placed upon it.

Best wishes

You wrote:

Perhaps this comment is more on point than my previous one. I did spot Zak Poonen’s error straightaway as I have a NASB translation and checked it out. Moreover, depending on which translation one consults the mentions of tribulation in the OT seem to vary from three to zero. This alone should make one wary of building a case on such a weak foundation.

Your observation that the zero appearance of a word in the Bible is a weak foundation on which to build a case is spot on. In fact, a child in grade 1 will be able to tell that a non-existent word is completely imperceptible and, therefore, unreadable, and an unreadable imperceptibility cannot possibly be interpreted in any way because it is non-existent. This is precisely why Jack Poonen proclaimed that the word “tribulation” is never once found in the Old Testament which allegedly makes it a new covenant word. Even the assumption that a single appearance, or a second, or a three-times appearance of a word in the Bible is a weak foundation to build a case, is equally wrong.

There are many words in the Bible that appear only once in the Bible. There are between 300 and 400 of them known as hapax legomena, the meaning of which in Greek is “only once.” Are we going to affirm that the Gospel of God is built on a weak foundation because some words appear only once in the Bible? Just because a word appears only once in the Bible, does not mean that word is less significant or less inspired than any other word that appears many more times in Scripture. To affirm that the minority appearance of a word or words in the Bible determines the quality of the foundation on which to build a case is the worst kind of eisegesis there is.

I will answer the rest of your questions later.

Your effort to draw a comparison between “Christ’s victory” and man’s “free-will,” to prove that free-will is a misnomer, is inappropriate. One of the greatest victories God ever procured in the history of mankind was when He miraculously led Israel out of their bondage in Egypt. In fact, it prefigures the victory of Christ on the cross centuries later. Yet, God had to give Israel a choice between “life” and “death” during their sojourn in the desert. (Deuteronomy 30:17-19). Do you really think God would have given them this choice if they had no free-will?

If salvation were dependent on the election, predestination, and foreordination of free-will-less zombies who cannot understand, respond, and believe the Gospel of their own accord, Christ’s victory would have been a complete failure. Why? Because free-will and love cannot be separated. Don’t you know that God made man in his own image which includes the freedom to choose? Are you married? Assuming you are, did your husband force you to marry him, or did you choose to marry him because you love him? If love was the deciding factor in your decision to get married, why do you doubt God’s integrity to grant his creatures the same kind of choice, or do you believe as do the Calvinists that He unconditionally clobbers his elect over their heads and then limitedly drags them to his den like the ancient barbarians?

Perhaps this comment is more on point than my previous one. I did spot Zak Poonen’s error straightaway as I have a NASB translation and checked it out. Moreover, depending on which translation one consults the mentions of tribulation in the OT seem to vary from three to zero. This alone should make one wary of building a case on such a weak foundation.

‘Only those who are deliriously moon-struck with images of what a Christian should look like will say that the three examples quoted above refer to Christians and not unbelievers’.

What do you mean by moon-struck? Do you mean lunatic or mentally deranged in some way or something else perhaps?

I noticed in one of your examples that you refer to 2 Thess 1:5-6.(Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you) [parentheses and emphases mine] and checked it out.

It would appear that tribulation and trouble are the noun and verb forms of the same same Greek word which suggests that tribulation can be meted out on believers by unbelievers and that God will mete out judgement on them in recompense, unless I have misunderstood your point.

In respect of your reference to Rev 3:10. It’s difficult for me to see the rapture at all here. Are you interpreting Rev 3:10 allegorically in some way?

A final question for now. Do you think the tribulation and the day of the Lord are synonymous?

Best wishes

‘If Christ’s victory is dependant upon us, then one may as well believe that our salvation is also dependant on use’.

if you believe in free will, as I think you do, then ultimately our salvation must depend on it and therefore on us. Is that a fair assessment?

Best wishes.

Veeta, do you believe the word “tribulation” is a new covenant word and never once appears in the Old Testament? Then you too are a liar. Anything said contrary to what the Bible teaches, no matter who teaches it, albeit a man of God who has suffered for his faith like Corrie the Boom, is lying. To call any kind of villainy against Jesus Christ’s return for his own at the Pre-trib Rapture a mere mistake, is heavily deceived and a liar. Why are you more concerned about Zack Poonen’s public image while you don’t seem to care about his audacity to make Jesus Christ out to be a liar who supposedly never once used the word tribulation in the Old Testament? Is Poonen more important to you than Jesus Christ and his return at the Pre-trib Rapture? (Galatians 1:10).

And you’d better repent of your curse “People like you will rot in hell” because you are misrepresenting the God of the Bible who said, “Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” (Ezekiel 33:11). You’d better turn from you evil of getting pleasure from sending us to rot in hell. You are playing with fire. REPENT!