To perform proper exegesis on this passage we must ask who was this passage written to ,was it the church or unbelievers ? It was not unbelievers but the believing church .To use this passage to promote the free will doctrine would be wrong .You would be taking this passage out of context !
@@backwatersage no child can understand anything apart from the Holy Spirit .Calvin has it right ,we are all dead in our trespasses and sins before we come to Christ and no man can come unless the Holy Spirit enables them .The Holy Spirit does not enable everyone ,only those God has elected and chosen to inherit salvation
You acknowledge you don't believe in irresistible grace or that regeneration proceeds faith. Not sure why you want to say you camp in the middle. That's arminian theology 101 you're adhering to. Which the church declared as error and a false view rejecting God's word at the Synod of Dort.
This debate is very much misunderstood because in the West we are hyper individualistic. We see everything as 'I' and 'me' especially in UK and America. This is where most of Armenian and Calvinist doctrine has been firmed up. Not to mention this is vacant and nonexistent until the 5th century and later in Augustines life. He was very much NOT A "CALVINIST" early in life. But debating moved him in that direction Further both of these are on the same side of the coin. They just oppose each other on that same side. God is the savior of all men, especially believers. He does not desire any to perish, but for all to come to repentance. He Himself is the atoning sacrificea for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. I had a Prof in seminary, a very Calvinistic one, who said that if one of the points of TULIP are true, they all are. I say then if one is FALSE they all are. The L of limited atonement is patiently false. Based on just one verse. One verse should be enough. Of course there are 3 above, but there are many more. Thus I am no longer a Calvinist. I love many Calvinist authors and pastors. No. I'm not Arminian either, because they are nearly identical to Calvinism. If you disagree, don't. Go spend several hours and invest in the teaching of Arminius and see how much of a Calvinist he really is
@@Richardcontramundum You said God is not willing that any should perish. But people perish. If God isnt willing that any should perish and they perish then God just went against his own will.
@@billyr9162 well that's what the scripture says. So I'm going with that. The issue of people not believing is not because of God. It is simply because human rebels just like you and me. Belief or lack of it falls onyo humanity
@@butgod2480 Nope, we're saying God chose the PLAN, not the MAN. The only Chosen One is Jesus because he lived a sinless life, He was therefore Holy and blameless against God when sacrificed on the Cross. When He resurrected from Hell, He paved the way for ANYONE to come to Him, because the work of Christ is what saves. Not the man/woman's decision. Once you accept Christ, you are therefore blameless against God as well. Under "reformed" theology. You are MADE blameless because the Holy Spirit changes you, not the work of Christ. That's a fundamental difference between Christianity and "reformed" theology.
@@josephthomasmusic Ephesians is addressed to the "saints" in verse 1 then says this in verse 4 "just as He chose US in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love..." Is Jesus the "US" then? If the US is Jesus, how can God choose Jesus in Himself as the verse dictates? When you pull that thread of biased interpretation, a lot more becomes unraveled by doing so. God doesn't "choose" a plan, he did this before the foundation of the world.
All I know for sure...salvation is a work of God. -- No one seeks after God If you have the option of saying NO to God's call unto salvation then God's word returns void -- We know that God's word DOES NOT return void. And where in the world does the bible say "..try it out for 7 days...if you don't like it give it back?"
To ponder, what is the worst sin? Defaming or denying the HOLY SPIRIT. If this sin is possible then the question is not can you “lose” your salvation, but it appears that you can deny or give it away. One can accept JESUS and obtain salvation and later deny him and give away their salvation. Arminists would call this free will. Calvinists would call this a false conversion. People can backslide, it is Biblical.
This guy is so confused. He agrees with Regeneration precedes Faith,but declares earlier we have the ability to reject or accept Christ? Does he mean a Regenerate man has the ability to reject or accept Christ?If so,do you become unregenerate again?
@@drivebyquipper because God uses his people, those who have believed, as the mean to spread the gospel to those who have not believed and would believe. Hence, we dont know who would believe. And the gospel is the way to salvation. 13 For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." 14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" (Romans 10:13-15, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper umm No you dont. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:30, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper you must be universalist. Correction. You are universalist. Typical misinterpretation of John 3:16 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:15-16, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper there you go. Misinterpreting the word "WORLD" . LOL. Typical. World in this verse does not mean every human being. It simply means humanity in general. Its Greek word for kosmos.
@@pavelkovalishin3160The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are 3 distinct persons in one. Jesus is always speaking of the Father and His will and later the Holy Spirit. 7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. 8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: (John 16:7-8, ESV).
We know all Christians who have become new (spiritual) creations in Christ Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit and faith in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) have the Spirit of God (Romans 8:9)--the Spirit that helps us to understand spiritual truth--the truth of God's Word (John 16:13). Yet, we all know it is not uncommon to see and hear Christians--true Spirit-regenerated, Spirit-adopted sons and daughters of God--disagree over the interpretation of certain biblical texts of scripture, even among those who are proficient at reading the original Hebrew and Greek language. A perfect example of this is the series of posts entitled "Beyond the Fundamentals" on Facebook, in which one Pastor Kevin Thompson vehemently opposed the biblical Doctrines of Grace (he calls it Calvinism, though these biblical doctrines were believed and circulated long before John Calvin). He claims that "Calvinists" are using verses like John 6:44 (he conveniently leaves out verses 63 and 65 in the same chapter and context), Acts 16:14, John 10:26; Acts 13:48; John 15:16; many more verses, to deliberately deceive Christians and lure them into "Calvinism". What nonsense! Nothing could be farther from the truth. You don't have to an infallible interpreter to understand what these verses mean in their biblical context any more than you have to be an infallible mathematician to know that 2+ 2=4. They are so straightforward and clear that anyone correctly using proven rules of grammar and literary context (and always under the guidance of the Holy Spirit who indwells the believer) can accurately interpret them. Of course, knowledge of the original Hebrew and Greek is a great asset (and I am in no way diminishing its importance) but I, and many others, know of humble and godly servants of Christ who have been enabled by the Holy Spirit to understand scripture as well, if not better, than some who have diligently studied Hebrew and Greek. I don't know how much Hebrew or Greek pastor Kevin Thompson knows (some with a good understanding of Hebrew and Greek have corrected his interpretation more than once) but I believe his efforts to belittle and discredit those who have long believed and taught the biblical Doctrines of Grace, including humble and godly servants of God who were greatly used of God to reach tens/hundreds of thousands for Christ---for example, Bunyan, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards (First Great Awakening in New England States), Asahel Nettleton (Second Great Awakening in New England) , Dr. D. Martin Loyd Jones, etc.----are not primarily because he does not understand the plain, straightforward meaning of such biblical texts, as aforementioned, but because he does not want to accept that these texts mean what they plainly say for the same reason other Christians reject same--they don't like what they say because they do not support their theological deck of cards. Let's look at a couple of these texts--Acts 16:14 (read it) I think that only the most obstinate Christian ( I have encountered many in my lifetime ) would claim that the message that Paul preached (and Lydia heard) in the biblical context of Acts 16:9--Paul accepting the Macedonian call to preach the Gospel--was not the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ and would deny that that it was the Lord who opened Lydia's heart (what Bible scholars agree is regeneration or new birth) to enable Lydia to believe Paul's message (the Gospel): "And a certain woman named Lydia...heard us:whose heart the LORD OPENED , that she attended unto the things (the gospel) which were spoken of Paul" (KJV, see NIV). If anyone is denying what scripture says--and says explicitly and emphatically--it is the person who is reading far more into the text (eisegesis, not biblical exegesis) than what it purports to say because they do not like what it says, plain and simple. Acts 13:48 is another verse, the truth of which Christians like Kenneth Taylor have gone to great lengths to deny in his Living Bible (marketed as a translation, even though it is a paraphrase.). He translates Acts 13:48 in this way: "....as many as wanted eternal life, believed." This is not paraphrasing in order to better understand the truth; this is radically and deliberately changing the meaning in order to hide the truth. Spurgeon himself answered Taylor's distortion long before it was ever made. The great Baptist preacher explained Acts 13:48 well: "Attempts have been made to prove that these words do not teach predestination, but these attempts so clearly do violence that I will not waste my time in answering them. I read, "..as many as were ordained to eternal life believed," and I shall not twist the text but shall glorify the grace of god by ascribing it to every man's faith. Is it not God who gives the disposition to believe? If men are disposed to have eternal life, does not He in every case dispose them? Is it wrong for God to give grace? If it be right for Him to give it, is it wrong for him to PURPOSE to give it? Would you have him give it by accident. If it is right for him to purpose to give grace today, it was right for him to purpose to give it before that date--and since he changes not--from eternity.". I thoroughly agree. God bless.
Anyone who says, "I'm not an Arminian" ... is... wait for it... Arminian.
Behold I stand at the door and knock, and if ANY MAN hear my voice...
To perform proper exegesis on this passage we must ask who was this passage written to ,was it the church or unbelievers ? It was not unbelievers but the believing church .To use this passage to promote the free will doctrine would be wrong .You would be taking this passage out of context !
@@backwatersage no child can understand anything apart from the Holy Spirit .Calvin has it right ,we are all dead in our trespasses and sins before we come to Christ and no man can come unless the Holy Spirit enables them .The Holy Spirit does not enable everyone ,only those God has elected and chosen to inherit salvation
that verse is to the church not believers
@@davidfl101 Any means any. Any is inclusive. Any refers to all.
6 angry frustrated Calvinists gave this a dislike
You acknowledge you don't believe in irresistible grace or that regeneration proceeds faith. Not sure why you want to say you camp in the middle. That's arminian theology 101 you're adhering to. Which the church declared as error and a false view rejecting God's word at the Synod of Dort.
This debate is very much misunderstood because in the West we are hyper individualistic. We see everything as 'I' and 'me' especially in UK and America. This is where most of Armenian and Calvinist doctrine has been firmed up. Not to mention this is vacant and nonexistent until the 5th century and later in Augustines life. He was very much NOT A "CALVINIST" early in life. But debating moved him in that direction
Further both of these are on the same side of the coin. They just oppose each other on that same side.
God is the savior of all men, especially believers.
He does not desire any to perish, but for all to come to repentance.
He Himself is the atoning sacrificea for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
I had a Prof in seminary, a very Calvinistic one, who said that if one of the points of TULIP are true, they all are. I say then if one is FALSE they all are.
The L of limited atonement is patiently false. Based on just one verse. One verse should be enough. Of course there are 3 above, but there are many more.
Thus I am no longer a Calvinist. I love many Calvinist authors and pastors.
No. I'm not Arminian either, because they are nearly identical to Calvinism. If you disagree, don't. Go spend several hours and invest in the teaching of Arminius and see how much of a Calvinist he really is
If God is not willing that any should perish then he would not willingly let them die.
It's a contradiction.
@@billyr9162 I don't understand your comment
@@Richardcontramundum
You said God is not willing that any should perish. But people perish.
If God isnt willing that any should perish and they perish then God just went against his own will.
@@billyr9162 well that's what the scripture says. So I'm going with that.
The issue of people not believing is not because of God. It is simply because human rebels just like you and me. Belief or lack of it falls onyo humanity
@@Richardcontramundum
It's not what scripture says
If that's what scripture says God would be going against himself.
We are not predestined to believe. We are predestined after we believe .
MrBazinthenow yep
MrBazinthenow we are predestined for adoption
So, we believe then God steals that from us by THEN making it His decision? I'll bet He appreciates you.
@@butgod2480 Nope, we're saying God chose the PLAN, not the MAN. The only Chosen One is Jesus because he lived a sinless life, He was therefore Holy and blameless against God when sacrificed on the Cross. When He resurrected from Hell, He paved the way for ANYONE to come to Him, because the work of Christ is what saves. Not the man/woman's decision. Once you accept Christ, you are therefore blameless against God as well. Under "reformed" theology. You are MADE blameless because the Holy Spirit changes you, not the work of Christ. That's a fundamental difference between Christianity and "reformed" theology.
@@josephthomasmusic Ephesians is addressed to the "saints" in verse 1 then says this in verse 4 "just as He chose US in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love..." Is Jesus the "US" then? If the US is Jesus, how can God choose Jesus in Himself as the verse dictates? When you pull that thread of biased interpretation, a lot more becomes unraveled by doing so. God doesn't "choose" a plan, he did this before the foundation of the world.
All I know for sure...salvation is a work of God. -- No one seeks after God
If you have the option of saying NO to God's call unto salvation then God's word returns void -- We know that God's word DOES NOT return void.
And where in the world does the bible say "..try it out for 7 days...if you don't like it give it back?"
To ponder, what is the worst sin?
Defaming or denying the HOLY SPIRIT.
If this sin is possible then the question is not can you “lose” your salvation, but it appears that you can deny or give it away.
One can accept JESUS and obtain salvation and later deny him and give away their salvation.
Arminists would call this free will.
Calvinists would call this a false conversion.
People can backslide, it is Biblical.
Believe in your heart
This guy is so confused. He agrees with Regeneration precedes Faith,but declares earlier we have the ability to reject or accept Christ? Does he mean a Regenerate man has the ability to reject or accept Christ?If so,do you become unregenerate again?
i think john Miller deny trinity
Arminian not “Armenian”.
Good way to put it: If you believe one side, you will lose your salvation. If you believe the other side you will lose your mind! That is great!
That's not what Calvinism teaches. This guy is really confused. 😕
Which part? Because everything he said about Calvinism is exactly what is taught. Generally speaking, of course there are exceptions
@@drivebyquipper because God uses his people, those who have believed, as the mean to spread the gospel to those who have not believed and would believe. Hence, we dont know who would believe. And the gospel is the way to salvation.
13 For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." 14 How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15 And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" (Romans 10:13-15, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper umm No you dont.
And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:30, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper you must be universalist. Correction. You are universalist. Typical misinterpretation of John 3:16
15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:15-16, ESV)
@@drivebyquipper there you go. Misinterpreting the word "WORLD" . LOL. Typical. World in this verse does not mean every human being. It simply means humanity in general. Its Greek word for kosmos.
This guy is confused himself 🤦
yes he pervert the scriptures. there is no verse that quote *no one can come to me unless the Spirit draws*
De' Raino it’s John 6:44
The Father uses the Spirit to draw people to Jesus Christ
The Spirit is at work among the people
No confusion there
@@pavelkovalishin3160The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are 3 distinct persons in one. Jesus is always speaking of the Father and His will and later the Holy Spirit. 7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you. 8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: (John 16:7-8, ESV).
@@EDSONHLYCHHO22 John 6:44
@@imacholmes3781 where in John 6:44 does it say the Holy Spirit?
We know all Christians who have become new (spiritual) creations in Christ Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit and faith in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17) have the Spirit of God (Romans 8:9)--the Spirit that helps us to understand spiritual truth--the truth of God's Word (John 16:13). Yet, we all know it is not uncommon to see and hear Christians--true Spirit-regenerated, Spirit-adopted sons and daughters of God--disagree over the interpretation of certain biblical texts of scripture, even among those who are proficient at reading the original Hebrew and Greek language. A perfect example of this is the series of posts entitled "Beyond the Fundamentals" on Facebook, in which one Pastor Kevin Thompson vehemently opposed the biblical Doctrines of Grace (he calls it Calvinism, though these biblical doctrines were believed and circulated long before John Calvin). He claims that "Calvinists" are using verses like John 6:44 (he conveniently leaves out verses 63 and 65 in the same chapter and context), Acts 16:14, John 10:26; Acts 13:48; John 15:16; many more verses, to deliberately deceive Christians and lure them into "Calvinism". What nonsense! Nothing could be farther from the truth. You don't have to an infallible interpreter to understand what these verses mean in their biblical context any more than you have to be an infallible mathematician to know that 2+ 2=4. They are so straightforward and clear that anyone correctly using proven rules of grammar and literary context (and always under the guidance of the Holy Spirit who indwells the believer) can accurately interpret them. Of course, knowledge of the original Hebrew and Greek is a great asset (and I am in no way diminishing its importance) but I, and many others, know of humble and godly servants of Christ who have been enabled by the Holy Spirit to understand scripture as well, if not better, than some who have diligently studied Hebrew and Greek.
I don't know how much Hebrew or Greek pastor Kevin Thompson knows (some with a good understanding of Hebrew and Greek have corrected his interpretation more than once) but I believe his efforts to belittle and discredit those who have long believed and taught the biblical Doctrines of Grace, including humble and godly servants of God who were greatly used of God to reach tens/hundreds of thousands for Christ---for example, Bunyan, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards (First Great Awakening in New England States), Asahel Nettleton (Second Great Awakening in New England) , Dr. D. Martin Loyd Jones, etc.----are not primarily because he does not understand the plain, straightforward meaning of such biblical texts, as aforementioned, but because he does not want to accept that these texts mean what they plainly say for the same reason other Christians reject same--they don't like what they say because they do not support their theological deck of cards.
Let's look at a couple of these texts--Acts 16:14 (read it) I think that only the most obstinate Christian ( I have encountered many in my lifetime ) would claim that the message that Paul preached (and Lydia heard) in the biblical context of Acts 16:9--Paul accepting the Macedonian call to preach the Gospel--was not the saving Gospel of Jesus Christ and would deny that that it was the Lord who opened Lydia's heart (what Bible scholars agree is regeneration or new birth) to enable Lydia to believe Paul's message (the Gospel): "And a certain woman named Lydia...heard us:whose heart the LORD OPENED , that she attended unto the things (the gospel) which were spoken of Paul" (KJV, see NIV). If anyone is denying what scripture says--and says explicitly and emphatically--it is the person who is reading far more into the text (eisegesis, not biblical exegesis) than what it purports to say because they do not like what it says, plain and simple.
Acts 13:48 is another verse, the truth of which Christians like Kenneth Taylor have gone to great lengths to deny in his Living Bible (marketed as a translation, even though it is a paraphrase.). He translates Acts 13:48 in this way: "....as many as wanted eternal life, believed." This is not paraphrasing in order to better understand the truth; this is radically and deliberately changing the meaning in order to hide the truth. Spurgeon himself answered Taylor's distortion long before it was ever made. The great Baptist preacher explained Acts 13:48 well: "Attempts have been made to prove that these words do not teach predestination, but these attempts so clearly do violence that I will not waste my time in answering them. I read, "..as many as were ordained to eternal life believed," and I shall not twist the text but shall glorify the grace of god by ascribing it to every man's faith. Is it not God who gives the disposition to believe? If men are disposed to have eternal life, does not He in every case dispose them? Is it wrong for God to give grace? If it be right for Him to give it, is it wrong for him to PURPOSE to give it? Would you have him give it by accident. If it is right for him to purpose to give grace today, it was right for him to purpose to give it before that date--and since he changes not--from eternity.". I thoroughly agree. God bless.
This guy presents strawman arguments regarding Calvinism.
Every Calvinist says that. 😉