again. you say every man means all who believe (verse doesnt say it). john macarthur is a lying hypocrite. he hates on modern liberal fun churches yet his yout camp is just absolutely degenerate with waterslides and just a worldly party, saying we can take mark of the beast and be saved still as long as we dont worship the beast. he also pushes that ridicilous "middle eastern men just dont run" i heard him and many parrots say it. thats so stupid, they have to invent that fake history to find something to talk about, fill in time when preaching that prodigal son story, ooh look he ran to the father ruined his reputation ran thru the city (bible says nothing about city or village either). look up "ran" and "run" in bible, people running to Jesus all over the place in the book. some of these fake pastors really make me angry
you do same with titus 2:11 as with the hebrews, you change first definition: you change it from GOd's grace which bring salvation to all and bring to people's mind that this means atuomatically that they are saved. second you change it from all to all ethnic groups not just some...........
come on man. how can you be so adamant and confident in your calvinism when you have to twist so many scriptures and reinterpret them to make them fit the reformed understanding of eph 2 and other total depravity proof texts you guys blow out of proportion?
If that's your view, I'd be glad to put you on ignore. Answering your questions is time consuming anyways.
My policy is to shake the dust off my feet when people don't want to hear what I've got to say.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with waterslides unless you're some type of hypocritical Baptist or Pentecostal. They have weird rules like that. They don't want kids to have fun.
Regarding Jewish men, it is my understanding that older Jewish men didn't typically run, and to do so would have been an expression of great joy that the Father had for a son who repented. Since the entire chapter has this context, relating to individuals being extremely happy finding a lost item, as being symbolic of the joy God has for a sinner returning back to a relationship with him, I have no idea why you would be disappointed with his explanation on that. Perhaps you don't know how to read parables, though, or you don't understand Jewish culture, or your Pastor Anderson doesn't approve of that view. At any rate, I don't see his explanation as being unreasonable.
I'm not surprised that you have issues with understanding the Bible, given that you can't understand a simple set of parables like that, though. Go back and read that chapter and look for the common thread.
God is happy with seeing "sinners" and "tax collectors" returning back to him, and in fact, so joyous he's willing to "make a fool of himself" expressing it. He isn't nonchalant about it.
I am not the Scripture-twister. Your view twists Scripture. Which doesn't really surprise me if you are following Stephen Anderson.
Regarding the Mark of the Beast thing, I have heard there was some controversy over that but I don't remember the details. However, anyone who has a desire to repent and believe can. This would be evidence that God is regenerating them.