Jerry Walls: What's Wrong With Calvinism, Part 2
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 ноя 2016
- Part 1: • Jerry Walls: What's Wr...
In this edition of the Evangel University Guest Lecture Series, Dr. Jerry Walls of Houston Baptist University addresses the topic, "Calvinism & The God of Love."
Funding for this event was provided by the John Templeton foundation through a grant from the Institute for Humane Studies.
© 2016 Jerry Walls. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
The audio quality on this segment is atrocious. I really hope Mr. Walls takes it upon himself to redo this segment so that the lesson is more effective. It is hard to follow because of the audio quality.
The video switcher seems to be set for audio to follow video, and the audio is coming from the camera-mounted mics and not the lapel mic that he’s wearing. They might’ve been short-staffed and there was no one monitoring audio. Yeah, it’s really, really bad.
@@timmatteson3959 good points. Thank God that we can listen and understand still.
I don’t find it that bad.
I’ve been pondering this reformed theology that is creeping into Baptist pulpits. Having been deceived in the past by a denomination that claims a special revelation, I have sharpened my biblical senses to perceive error when it rears its ugly head. Such is my opinion of Calvinism. I have found most Calvinist to be cock sure of their predestined election but fail to understanding of our Father’s loving character. I fail to understand how they can cling to this error when Jesus clearly stated that to see Him its to see the Father.
Great testimony showing how God will lovingly bring us out of false theology if we will but seek Him with all our heart, mind, soul and strength! And you're also correct in stating the re-emergence of Calvinism within the SBC... some estimates say just under 6 of every 10 SBC pastors cling to some form of Calvinism, and that's just under 6 too many.
As Dr. Walls correctly points out, Calvinism starts with an incorrect definition of God's sovereignty, which leads to an incorrect understanding of God's character - how could a God of LOVE, as so clearly shown from Genesis through Revelation, willingly and knowingly create humans and give them NO HOPE of eternal life... and all in a demonstration of His sovereignty, or so claims the Calvinists.Is God also lying (something His Word says he simply CANNOT do) when He says over and over, in both Testaments, to CHOOSE? How can a choice be authentic if the one who is offered has NO CHANCE of choosing, since in Calvinism the choice has already been made by God?
And furthermore, have you ever heard a Calvinist admit that he or she COULD be a reprobate? In their theology, if they are honest, they HAVE to admit they could be deceived since salvation is ONLY from God and only KNOWN by God.
They also have to dance the two-step around definitions of words like "whosoever," "all," "world" and many others in order to make their theology work. It's a dangerous and deceitful theology that has the possibility of leading people away from God instead of closer to Him.
@@wfxxfox1963 God is the Law, not "love". This too is heresy.
@@psalm2764 1 John 4:16 clearly disagrees with you... "God is love." And as far as the Law is concerned, Jesus clearly addressed this as well in Matthew 5:17, saying, "Do not think that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy but fulfill."
So Jesus, the PERFECT example of His Father ("I and My Father are one," John 10:30) taught that He Himself is the personification of LOVE, and then proved it by willingly dying on the cross as the ULTIMATE example of God's LOVE.
I fear for your eternal soul if you believe the Bible and the message of Christianity is the Law. Please read the short but powerful book of Galatians and learn of the dangers of trying to keep the Law in order to be justified and righteous before a Holy God. May the Holy Spirit open your eyes to His Truth and NOT the so-called truth of a man-made theology.
@@psalm2764 1 John 4:8 : Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
@@r.fortner4661 Taking the whole counsel of God into consideration, it is not appropriate to surmise that "God is love". He is the Law and wholly Righteous. That is why He took the form of a man and let His Creation slaughter Him.
Great exposition. God is love. Thank you from France
Thank you Dr. Walls! 👍
truly..if you think God does not love all his creation..and desires to save them through his son...then you don't know that God is love 1 John 4:7&8
show me
YES! !!
Yes ! Correct .! God is love ! The gospel from Genesis 1:1 to revelation 22:21 is all about love. A benevolent father .
Jesus spoke John 14:21 .!!!
Jesus spoke ACTS 1:8
Psalms 91:1 is absolute .
The greatest love book to read is the Bible . Get a one year devotion. Bible and read it through in a year .
My dad use to read it about 4 times a year .
Dad is in heaven . Dad blest me as his oldest son . I sang hymns to him on his death bed . His mortal body put on immortality when his heart stopped .
He was so honest and true and joyful . He never drank alcohol. He never ran around . He showed his trade skills to others upon request . He taught adult Sunday school class for approximately
40- 50 years. He died peacefully.
I love Jesus Christ
I love dad .
Golden rule is sufficient . When I obey and do it .
Willieboogie808 - I agree with you . Jesus loves kids . Jesus loves the woman in John chapter 4 . Married FIVE TIMES . LIVING WITH A MAN . Jesus talks with her . He requests a drink from the well . He offers her living water. He satisfies her thirst. She probably did give him a drink !!!!
She runs around after they talked !! Sharing the good tidings of great joy that happened
To her . She gets healed and tells everyone .
Jesus did not need T. U. L. I. P. JUNK TO DEFINE
WHO HE is .!! SO WE DONT NEED JOHN CALVIN GOSPEL EITHER .
So cut out the bullshit . And wash feet . And get the job done .
So quit exploiting a few words to discriminate against precious people .
great video , the teaching was very powerful the audio was a minor detail. tks for uploading this video
Psalm 11:5 (KJV 1900): The Lord trieth the righteous:
But the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
@@ThomasCranmer1959 And what is His soul? It is His nature. His nature is in conflict with the wicked, but not God Himself.
God says, "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live" (Eze 33:11).
So why would God want the wicked turn if He doesn't love them. If He didn't love them He would say, "I HAVE pleasure in the death of the wicked. You wicked geteth what cometh your way.".
First off, the quote from Ezekiel 33:11 is directed to the people of the nation of Israel, not to all the nations of that time. So the OT nation of Israel is the visible congregation or church of the OT. Just as today the church has both elect and reprobate persons, so did the church in that time. The warning passages are there to show the elect that they can lose their assurance of salvation. Those who do not repent and die in their sins were never saved. 1 John 2:19. Furthermore, I can give you many verses where God did desire to kill the wicked and send them to hell. The two sons of Eli is just one example.
“And he said unto them, Why do ye such things? for I hear of your evil dealings by all this people. Nay, my sons; for it is no good report that I hear: ye make the LORD’S people to transgress. If one man sin against another, the judge shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.” (1 Samuel 2:23-25, KJV)
“And the ark of God was taken; and the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, were slain.” (1 Samuel 4:11, KJV)
@@TheGuy..
If "No free will to choose" were true then the Judgment Seat of Christ and the Great White Throne Judgment would be a joke. Think on these things:. how could souls be judged and held responsible if their actions had been predestined without free will? Is that just
For those doubtful of the Calvinist theology as representing the true character and purpose of God's glorification through the TULIP acronym, may I suggest consulting Mike Winger's YT videos on Romans Chapter 9, which is one of the main two proof texts Calvinists use to present their arguments (along with Ephesians 1). These two videos explains in detail, with compelling exegisis what on what these chapters actually represents - how Paul referred back to the Old Testament to explain the new convenant under Jesus, and his second video that explains in more detail what and why God 'hardens hearts' and what that means for understanding salvation.
After hearing these videos, along with Jerry Walls excellent presentations opposing the Calvinist position, I am convinced as much as I can be that their position is the most likely accurate one and not those presented by the Reformed Calvinists who present God as a determinist - one who must creates all evil acts along with actions we would consider to be morally acceptable. One of the most compelling arguments Mike Winger states in regards to Total Depravity (the T in TULIP) : the idea that man is so fallen in sin that he is incapable of doing or choosing any action by himself other than to rebel against God and that even the act of coming to the faith is only by the divine intervention of God.
That argument is this one: if man is so depraved and so incapable of a simple act of responding to Gods calling without invitation by the living God first to 'inject' that response capability into him first of all, why was it ever necessary for God to harden the hearts of some figures represented in the Bible to stop them from coming to faith in the first place? It would be totally unnecessary. Plus there are numerous examples of God grieving for those who are lost, turn away from discipleship. Plus there are examples of why Jesus spoke in parables to stop those he was rejecting - at a particular time - from understanding what was written. They wouldn't understand anyway even if spoke clearly, wouldn't they? Why would God do this, if man had no free will to accept or reject his call? It makes no sense at all.
I am still open minded and, obviously, as my knowledge grows and my understanding, which must surely only come from reading scripture for myself and understanding it by myself (as God chooses to reveal himself to me, in scripture) rather than relying upon presentations offered by others who may well misrepresent those position that they oppose, leading me to draw erroneous conclusions, I can only say as much that Calvinism seems wrong to me, and offends my superficial understanding of God's nature. It does not represent a rejection of God as I truly know he is. For whatever God is like, whatever he decreed - whether the Calvinist theologian correctly presents, or the non-Calvinist one - God is righteous and just in what he decrees and whatever I or anyone else thinks is of no consequence at all because God judges us not we him.
God has no human character. He is in a totally different category. Define God and then define character.
@@ThomasCranmer1959 Jesus came as human flesh, and he did have character that you can recognise and copy.
@@PotterSpurn1 Jesus was both human and God. But is God in the Trinity human? God has no beginning or end. He is omniscience and omnipresent and omnipotent. Jesus was none of those things in His human nature during the incarnation. And the clincher is the Logos never stopped being God at any single point during the incarnation. So God has no law above Himself to which He can be held accountable. Whatever the Triune God does is right. It would imply that there is another God above God or a law higher than God. The Logos never gave up any of the incommunicable attributes of deity because God is immutable. Your analogy fails at every level.
Beware
of “gnat strainers & camel swallowers.!”
Tell truth - get love - get mercy . Rejoice !
Like Jerry Walls
I thank God for men like Jerry Walls! And I thank God that Calvinism is false and that the God of love (1 John 4:8) truly loves all men (John 3:16), died for all men (1 John 2:2), draws all men to Himself (John 12:32), offers mercy and salvation to all men (Romans 11:32, Titus 2:11), wants all men to be saved (1 Tim 2:4), and for none to perish (2 Peter 3:9). This is the true and living God of the Bible.
REDRAGON12345 Amen, and Amen!
What is Calvinism, and why is it false.
Psalm 11:5 (KJV 1900): The Lord trieth the righteous:
But the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
@@tricord2939 God is sovereign and nothing God does is wrong, including when God hates the wicked:
Psalm 11:5 (KJV 1900): The Lord trieth the righteous:
But the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
@@ThomasCranmer1959 Thank you for your reply, though I am asking Justin what it is and why it is false. The followers of Jerry Walls quote scripture out of context.
Great topic, poor sound.
I really wish the audio quality was better.
👌🏿 his book why I’m not a Calvinist is great
Specially if you like feelings without many facts.
Was it all of one sentence long? And did that sentence say something like “Because I refuse to properly exegete the text of scripture and ignore the parts that make me uncomfortable.” ??
If not, it wasn’t great. 😮
Has anyone figured out what his shirt says? I can only make out “Calvinism: minds…”
When Dr. Walls, a philosophy professor, makes it clear that his approach against Calvinism is from a philosophical perspective, yet people complain that he isn't using scripture... 😳😳😬😬
I agree with you here completely. And the weird thing is is that he is using scripture, but apparently not enough to satisfy some people. Oh well, can’t please everybody.
Jerry Walls is right! Because Calvinism is a philosophical
man made religion of lies.
It is a deception, and the ones touting it are either deceivers working for the darkside to deceive as many as possible, or they have been deceived, and are therefore deceiving others now.
Satan comes as a minister of light!
Satan roams the earth like a roaring lion seeking whom he can devour!
They think they are chosen/elect and everyone else can go to hell ---
Because after all --- the rest were created (billions) actually were created to go to hell (doomed from the womb) says John Calvin.
And they will die and go to hell all for the glory of GOD! UGH!
Only an evil man can say such things!
@@kimberleerivera3334 The Jews of Jesus' days, especially the Pharisees thought they were "elect" also simply for being in the bloodline of Abraham. I see a correlation between them and Calvinist philosophy "unconditional election"
Bingo! And that line of thinking is what Paul is addressing in Romans 9..."they are not all Israel who are of Israel".
@@maryvalentine9090mormons use scripture. Jehovah Witnesses use scripture. Muslims even use scripture. Atheists use scripture and new age use scripture. The question is, are they properly exegeting the text in light of the whole council of God’s word? Or are they just ripping verses and passages out of context in order to support their erroneous opinions?
With Jerry Walls, the well studied will find the latter to be the case.
LOve video but I wish audio was better
I like to ask Calvinists "If God is sovereign in all his decisions and he decides to let man choose his eternal destiny, who are you to argue with God?"
I am Reformed and yes God can allow us to do what we really want to do. Which is always EVIL in our Flesh unless God has regenerated us. We have a will but without God's Saving grace our will is corrupt.
If God is sovereign and he decides to judge someone guilty, who are you to argue with God?
@@tricord2939 Is God a liar? Is He double-minded?
"Say to them, ‘As I live!’ declares the Lord GOD, ‘I take no pleasure at all in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then should you die, O house of Israel?" --- Ezekiel 33:11 (NASB)
"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 (KJV)
False belief: But they can't repent and will perish because its your will, God. You take pleasure in it.
One who claims to be a representative of God and foolishly falsifies his reputation will not be found guiltless. (Exodus 20:7)
Look at the countenance of people who are false teachers. They are in misery.
@@TheJCFan 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.
@@TheJCFan You just voided your original comment.
I love the teaching of Jerry walls and I love God for allowing him to so clearly advocate for the traditionalist perspective but leave recording on this video is horrific
“Allowing him” and “traditionalist” are the key words here
@51:19 If this is the sort of thinking that turns Calvinists on. then why do most whom call themselves Calvinists adhere to a limited personal atonement rather than an unlimited impersonal one? If God constantly offered the damned a LEGITIMATE offer of salvation which they themselves REJECTED would that not give the elect more cause to rejoice, seeing that the rebrobes screwed the deal up by failing to believe thereby meriting a more complete damnation? if the grace for them to be like you was there & they rejected it due to hardness & the same grace was there and you received it due to the grace working in you being effective then would that not glorify God all the more in His legitimate refused offer of generosity? A secondary problem for this damnation gratefulness problem is WHAT DOES THE CALVINIST DO with the plain statement by Paul that many if not most of the ELECT suffer LOSS? 1 Corinthians 3:15 Suffering loss does not make the chosen any more happy does it? Or perhaps maybe suffering loss makes the ones that got a full reward more happy to God that they were not the ones chosen to suffer loss? @105:40 Yes popular Calvinism is plainly TWO FACED in all but a few cases. The Calvinists I once rubbed shoulders with were generally up front with their beliefs. The ones with big popular ministries however, generally do not present their "gospel" if you can call it that, right up front in their evangelistic campaigns. There is a gospel they present to the public that looks quite arminian or libratarian yet behind the scenes there is an esoteric form of thinking that generally is not presented to call the general public to believe it. The clique of Calvinists I once rubbed shoulders with after Creation Science Fellowship meetings did actually present their esoteric ism up front & were proud of it. @56:17 You see what Matthew J Hart left out? "..others.. same nature... same circumstances.." what about same opportunities? Because Calvinism generally does not see God giving the lost a legitimate offer .... because unlike in Jeopardy there really is nothing behind door number 2 which God legitimately called them to OPEN.. God does not call people then to TAKE A CHANCE like in Pascal's wager? When He calls the unelect to open the gospel door which they redfuse He has nothing behind it to win? God then is just bluffing as the general call goes out. That is the folly of personal limited atonement. Also even with personal unlimited atonement Arthur Pink sort of does not get it when he claims that Jesus Christ died for the sin of unbelief in his 3 choice argument 1) All of the sins of all men, 2) some of the sins of all men, 3) all of the sins of some men. is unbelief a sin? Of course it is. Yet in a personal atonement scenerio if Jesus died for a sin on your behalf that means YOU are destined to COMMIT IT. If Jesus did not die for a sin in your lifetime then you are destined to AVOID IT. Pink failed to understand that If Jesus Christ continuously died for every sin of unbelief you would commit from birth till death when faced with the gospel THEN YOU ARE DAMNED because you never believed. If Jesus Christ stopped paying for your unbelief at some point in your lifetime YOU BELIEVED ie you repented of your unbelief and therefore are saved. When Paul tells us that we should not sin in order that grace might abound then what if Jesus died for your abounding sin? If Jesus paid super abounding grace then does that mean my sins must abound? Can I then not avoid them? If I cannot avoid them then why does Paul tell me to avoid them?
1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.
There is nothing showing that John Calvin or Martin Luther, believed the doctrine of Limited Atonement. It sure has nothing of it in his commentaries and a full discussion of the scope of the atonement is not found in Calvin’s writings. It was a counter reaction on the Synod of Dordrecht against the Five articles of the Remonstrants [Arminius] 60 year after John Calvin had passed away. Calvin sure believed that the wrath of God came on Christ for the sins of the whole world which is Biblical. The importants of limited atonement is minor and hypothetical.
We find support that John Calvin did not concern himself with Thoughts of Limited Atonement in some of his commentaries.
BY JOHN CALVIN
“Also we ought to have good care of those that have been redeemed with the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. If we see souls which have been so precious to God go to perdition, and we make nothing of it, that is to despise the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.” [Sermon on Ephesians 5:11-14]
“The four reasons, whereby Paul doth carefully prick forward the pastors to do their duty diligently, because the Lord hath given no small pledge of His love toward the Church in shedding His own blood for it. Whereby it appeared how precious it is to him; and surely there is nothing which ought more vehemently to urge pastors to do their duty joyfully, than if they consider that the price of the blood of Christ is committed to them. For hereupon it followeth, that unless they take pains in the Church, the lost souls are not only imputed to them, but they be also guilty of sacrilege, because they have profaned the holy blood of the Son of God, and have made the redemption gotten by him to be of none effect, so much as in them lieth. And this is a most cruel offence, if, through our sluggishness, the death of Christ do not only become vile or base, but the fruit thereof be also abolished and perish ...” [Commentary on Acts 20:28]
“He makes this favor common to all, because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world, and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all, yet all do not receive him.” [Commentary on Romans 5:18]
“True it is that the effect of His death comes not to the whole world. Nevertheless, forasmuch as it is not in us to discern between the righteous and the sinners that go to destruction, but that Jesus Christ has suffered His death and passion as well for them as for us, therefore it behoves us to labour to bring every man to salvation, that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ may be available to them ...” [Sermon CXVI on the Book of Job (31:29-32)]
“The word many is not put definitely for a fixed number, but for a large number; for he contrasts himself with all others. And in this sense it is used in Romans 5:15, where Paul does not speak of any part of men, but embraces the whole human race.” [Commentary on Matthew 20:28]
Yes, I am having a terribly hard time understanding him
Ephesians 2:8-10.
This should end the debate between Reformed Theology and Arminianism. God is Glorified in all He does whether saving or sending people to hell.
Ephesians 2:8-10
[8] For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, [9] not a result of works, so that no one may boast. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Wow
The awful sound quality to this video makes me wonder if Satan is attempting to distract from the truth by entering into the editing room.
Thank you Jerry Walls!
GLORY TO GOD!
(The Calvinist are acting just like fallen man, and they speak like a true reprobate)
Wow. These arrogant modern arminians, their man centered theology, slander, and lack of love for the brethren is mind boggling.
If you knew what Arminius believed and professed you would call him a calvinist heretic.
Fix the audio please.
It’s such a shame the sound and editing of this video are both poor.
Sounds like they were sourcing audio from the camera-mounted mics instead of the audio console, where the lapel mic was plugged in. Too bad nobody bothered to put on headphones and check it before they got started.
Thanks for uploading this video. I wish the audio was clearer. Just when I thought Calvinism could not get wackier 34:10 offers the MOST ridiculous argument from the Calvinist camp that I have ever heard. Everyone is well aware that the devil and his angels are condemned to hell so why do people need to go there for God to be glorified?
Why does the devil and his angels need to go to hell for God to be glorified? But nevermind what Calvinists say. Let's see what the Bible says:
[+] For this reason God highly exalted Him and gave Him the name, That is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus, Every knee will bow -, Of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth - and every tongue should confess, That Jesus Christ is Lord, To the glory of God the Father. (Phil 2:9-11)
There you have it: people in hell confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the Glory of God the Father.
If God says so, then it is so.
You're welcome to try and figure out *why* it is so, but you're out of line to say *that* it is not so.
Thanks.
@@timffoster Calvinists are so smart, I've never considered that before. Let's see what 2 Thessalonians 1:10 says, "...when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, ..." and Ephesians 2:7 "...so that in ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus." Nobody has to go to hell in order for God to be glorious.
@@timffoster Whoa, you get that God hates almost everyone FROM THAT VERSE? No way do you have the same God I do.
I just want to note, there's a problem with the sound in the video, there's a lot of mumbling and you can hardly hear what is being said.
Xenosaurian - need to stop listening any way .
Get to the basic loving gospel beginning at Genesis 1:1 all the way to revelation 22:21 . And fall in love with our Savior . In whom we have redemption through HIS shed blood . The blood sacrifice that cost Jesus everything . So we can obtain eternal life. To share that life with everyone by the joy we get by obedience to ACTS 1:8 .
It is a sad time to live in
When we have had the great simple gospel to hear and digest for years and
Then someone’ wants to be a “silly woman !” And upset whole households with this junk from a dead man named John Calvin .
you are ignorant, the Reformation was about bringing forth Biblical doctrine because the catholic church had perverted the Gospel of Christ, but you wouldn't know that because you listen to men that focus on Calvin, but never make a Biblical response to the foundation of the Reformation the 5 Solas, Scripture alone, by Grace alone, thought Faith alone, in Christ alone, to the glory of God alone of which the doctrine of grace flow from. So if you want to talk about this let's start with the 5 Solas, is there any thing outside of Scripture that pertains to Salvation?
Are you aware of what you are saying?
You are being (ignorant) by calling this young man (ignorant).
I don't see the LOVE of GOD in your accusations. Please stop and think --- look in the mirror - ask yourself who do you think you are, and then read the Scriptures to see who GOD says you are.
Would you talk like that if JESUS CHRIST was standing beside you?
Would you accuse like that if JESUS CHRIST was standing beside you?
GOD is LOVE, and GOD is HOLY, HOLY, HOLY!
LOVE is stronger than death, so think, speak and live in the LOVE of GOD, living out GOD'S GOSPEL TRUTH IN LOVE, being an excellent witness of GOD'S GOSPEL. After all it is the GOSPEL
of LOVE, PEACE, AND GOOD NEWS to all men everyehere!
Agree. Calvinism is nonsense. It was created and is currently promoted by proud egotistical men who think they have God all figured out. It destroys the simple gospel.
I agree. We have a Messiah, let's read His words.
@@mrnoedahl In essence, a Calvanist decides whether or not he is "saved". Calvanism is like its curator: talmudic.
He also said that going down to the alter isn’t Biblical
What are you getting at?
“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance”
To me, that says all you need to know about Gods character concerning salvation. God wants to save everyone, it’s up to us to repent. It’s a choice. Yes there is grace involved to allow us to see the truth, but that grace is realized by the condition of our heart, which is dependent on a choice we make.
That’s how I saw it happen in my own life, and it seems obvious to me that this is the simple answer. You can philosophize about it, there certainly are many questions, but I think if you come back to this principle that God wants to save everyone and that it requires us to choose to repent, then it is not so difficult to understand the idea of the elect.
God sees the future. He knows how it will turn out, who will choose Him. But He is just, everyone will get their chance. That isn’t predestination, it’s just that God already knows what you will choose.
Everything gets a little wonky (from our perspective) when you start messing about with time, but it isn’t THAT hard to understand. It’s only when you want to get all philosophical and feel you require all the answers that everything gets weird. If you really need to know the answer to something like this, read scripture and seek God with an un condemned heart and I believe God will give you the answer you need.
For most people tho, this is just one more stumbling block put up by the enemy.
God is a gentleman. He will not force you to love Him. You get to make that choice, or else, it wouldn’t really be love.
Thank Jesus for choosing me! God is so gracious to us, to give us knowledge of Him, to allow us to choose salvation and to give us the grace to see and believe. God is good, and I choose to love Him for it:)
ridiculous you ignore most of the b8ble and know nothing about the ages. Its up to you? that is a gosple of grace for sure. men hate God by their very nature. where would repentance or any condition come from.. None of you ask the question. what did christ accomplish did he present in his body of flesh thru death. mean anything. The curses and anger of God are real. Nut were they fulfilled in Christ?
I looked and heard this whole video. I appreciate it. Worth tries to share how come some Calvinism is a cult. I clicked a thumbs up on it.
Today - we have more information than ever . And we ask more stupid questions than we did 40 years ago .
Why is that .??!
Provoke us to LOVE AND GOOD WORKS .
CAlVINISM IS FOR COWARDS .!! That are without proper enthusiasm for the gospel .!! Acts 1:8 should. Be all we need !!
Romans 1:16 !!
Ephesians 2:8&9
Ephesians 3:20&21
Ephesians 4:32
Calvinism” emerged as a term of insult from Lutherans addressing Reformed Protestants in order to separate themselves emphatically from the Reformed doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. Although John Calvin distanced himself from it, just as Luther protested the name “Lutherans,” this term has nevertheless been preserved, although it is problematic.
Calvinism is considered a synonym for “Reformed” and thus is typically understood as referring to something broader than the theology of Calvin himself. In addition to the Holy Scriptures as the most important norm, Calvinism serves, apart from Calvin’s own theology, as an independent continuation of the theological work of others including that of Augustine and Luther, as well as the works of Reformers such as Philip Melanchthon, Martin Bucer, Heinrich Bullinger, and Theodore Beza, all of whom are sources for what is called Calvinism.
The explanation for the fact that Calvin’s thinking is manifested not only in a multitude of Calvinist movements, but also in Lutheran Pietism, Methodism, Anglicanism, Baptist theology, and Puritanism, has to do with the fact that Calvin’s theology contains elements that made it interesting and attractive in the early modern period because it was easily transformed and adapted.
The term Calvinism is too broad and too diverse to be exact and could be replaced by Reformed Protestantism. Since, however, Calvinism is widespread and widely used, it should continue to be used, with a few caveats.
THE SPREAD OF CALVINISM
The spread of Calvinism in the sixteenth century may be called impressive in terms of time and scope. By 1554, there were about half a million Reformed Christians, but as early as 1600 there were approximately ten million. From the very beginning, Calvinism was strongly internationally oriented and has remained so since then.
Factors relating to this rapid and extensive dissemination were, above all, Calvin’s Academy in Geneva, the universities of Heidelberg and Leiden, and other Reformed academic institutions where theologians and lawyers from all over Europe were trained.
Calvinism has also had a great influence in Eastern Europe, especially in Hungary and parts of Romania. The initial spread in France could only be counteracted by force. In the German-speaking world, Calvinism gained the upper hand except in some Swiss cantons and in areas such as the Palatinate and East Frisia.
In Scotland and the Netherlands, there were no Calvinist churches but national Reformed Churches, which in reality were connected to secular governments by law and as such were less “Reformed” in practice.
Reformed theology has contributed to a worldview that has had a great impact on Western society and has also affected developments in church and theology in the Far East (Indonesia, Korea, Japan) and South Africa.
That there is great diversity within the broad Reformed tradition is, for example, evident from the fact that both Friedrich Schleiermacher and Karl Barth belong to it. Although efforts have been made to create a contradiction between Calvin and the Calvinists in the sense that developments in Reformed orthodoxy had substituted rigid scholasticism for the dynamics of Calvin’s theology, more recent research has proven that there is no basis for such a contradiction.
Also, the Synod of Dort (1618-19), which is seen as a highlight in the history of Calvinism, remained in Calvin’s line. Its decisions on double predestination, for example, were supported by delegates from Switzerland, Germany, and England, all representing various traditions within Calvinism.
THE THEOLOGY OF CALVINISM
The authority of the Bible as the source and norm for all of life, the sovereignty of God, and the responsibility of man are essential elements of Calvinistic doctrine. The Reformed doctrine of the Scriptures is formulated emphatically in the Reformed confessions. There it is confessed that the Scripture has supreme authority (because it is theopneustos, “God-breathed”), and that it is perfect, reliable, and sufficient.
Calvinism is distinguished in particular by the function of the law as well as by an openness to earthly life. In Calvin’s mind, the law has continuing meaning and is regarded as a rule for Christian life.
This view is expressed in various ways, including paying attention to a correct lifestyle, a commitment to mercy, continuing reflection on law and justice, and the question of the right of resistance of subjects to the authorities.
Openness to the earth has to do with Calvin’s view that God is also revealed in creation; thus, scientific research contributes to the recognition of God (Francis Bacon and Isaac Newton, among others).
Culturally, Calvinism inside the church led to resistance to the cult of images as a threat to the proclamation of the Word and outside the church to an impulse for art and culture as a means of worshiping God. There is, at the same time in Calvinism, a sense of reservation concerning culture and science, because these can also become a spiritual danger.
Concentration on the Word and the cognitive approach of the theology of Calvin can be seen in the fact that Calvinism has a distinguished history in terms of creating a reading culture and has attracted many intellectuals to its folds over the centuries.
This “binding to the Bible” has resulted in a church order that emanates from the independence of the church over against the governing authorities and assigns the elders the direction of the church.
The function of the elders, who play the central role in the church, is typical of the Calvinist understanding of the church. The key to the Lord’s Supper lies in the exercise of the church’s discipline.
The understanding of the unity of Scripture results in a strong identification with Old Testament Israel. This identification manifests itself in a predilection for the book of Psalms both in preaching and in liturgy.
The singing of these psalms further strengthened this identification, indeed, because of another characteristic of Calvinism, namely the pilgrimage motif. The persecution of the Reformed and their refugee existence led them, in their own opinion, to play the role of Israel expelled from Egypt to live in the desert on their way to heaven, the Promised Land.
This predilection for the Old Testament can be seen in the many commentaries that appeared from the Reformed side on this part of the Bible. As a result of this understanding, the study of Hebrew and related fields has also reached an especially great flowering in Reformed circles.
LUTHER AND CALVIN
As much as Calvin desired to do so, he never met Martin Luther personally. The only occasion for contact that could have occurred between Calvin and Luther was prevented by Philip Melanchthon, because he did not dare to forward the letter Calvin had written to Luther in January 1545.
There are some remarks of Luther in which he reports positively about Calvin’s works. As to Luther’s influence on Calvin, it is evident that the Genevan was in the true sense a pupil of the Reformer in Wittenberg.
Calvin was convinced to build on the foundation Luther laid down, not to imitate Luther or just repeat what he had said but to further develop Luther’s theology without changing it. As to differences, it can be said that Calvin had more trouble with Luther’s character than with his ideas.
That Calvin saw his own teaching of the Lord’s Supper substantially in agreement with that of Luther is clear, but he did criticize him for sticking too much to the physical presence of Christ in bread and wine.
Apart from this point, Calvin stays completely in line with Luther. This influence of Luther on Calvin means Luther’s thought can be found in a much wider selection of theological traditions than just the Lutheran one.
It is also due to international Calvinism that Luther can be found worldwide, as his spirituality, his liturgical insights, his views on preaching and teaching, and much more of his work has shaped endless numbers of Calvinists worldwide to this very day.
INFLUENCE
It goes without saying that Calvinism has a worldview of its own. It, thus, has exerted great influence in the fields of sociology, politics, economics, and law. Although the so-called Weber thesis, according to which there is a direct link between Calvinism and capitalism, is scientifically disproven, a certain influence of Calvinism on economic developments cannot be denied.
Calvin was the first Christian thinker to develop a theory of the biblical right to interest rate recovery, which gave trade a vital impetus. Calvinism’s views on justification and sanctification and the strict practice of church discipline have led to a lifestyle that is strongly inspired by the Bible.
The influence of Calvinism, with its very own view of law and order, is also clearly perceptible in the sphere of law. The political and legal theories of John Althusius (1557-1638) and Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) are examples of this.
Calvinism has also contributed to the democratic development of the Western world. The organizing principle of the “Calvinist” church, in which democracy and Christocracy are connected, has become, politically, a model wherein the government binds itself to the Bible as a norm without causing the theocratic element to be exercised at the expense of the democratic one. In addition, Calvin’s theory of the right to insurrection became one of the main foundations of the uprising that led to the independence of the Netherlands.
If Jerry Well's description of Calvinism is correct, during this presentation, I can only agree with the conclusions he draws, bearing in mind I have few resources of my own to draw upon - given that I have not read the Bible all the way through, let alone fully understood what it says and how it all hangs together. I only know that by preaches from other pastors who might have also conveyed a false message of the love of God, much the way Jerry describes here, where he says that Calvinist present as an all-encompassing loving figure who calls everyone to repent knowing - as far as they are concerned - God has no such plans to receive all that try. So I have little to recommend of myself to this debate, intellectually by way of substance. I only have the ability to be objective, to think straight in a rather abstract fashion, drawing upon what little I know.
So here goes....
The idea that those in Heaven could be even more grateful for being there than they otherwise would be - which is more glorifying to God - knowing that most are damned strikes me as ridiculous. Why? Let's stick to the secular realm for a moment: there are envious people on earth who are happy to own more than others and it enhances their happiness knowing that they have access to the resources they have but others don't have. Although I would say that the decent are not amongst those with that attitude. The decent might own a lot, be happy most of the time and content but they get no pleasure at all knowing that others are not as lucky. If that were not so there would be no charities or people willing to sacrifice and do good and donate money. E.g., Live Aid, etc.
To move on, and this is important: there is a key difference between the two examples - the heavenly contentment and the earthly one - irrespective of whether you are nice person or not. On earth , unlike heaven, resources are scarce. So what one person has is because someone else does not. There is a zero sum game going on. We don't have an abundance of everything that all can obtain even in the most equity based economic model. We saw what happens under communism. It starts with good intentions stemming from a Philosophical position of obtaining equity and eradicating inequality, but you end up with Animal Farm (Orwell). Yes, greed exists but everything could potentially run out, be lost forever. So we covet what we can to survive and to thrive and yes it is likely to be at the expense of someone that doesn't have what we have. This is the essence of the misguided social justice movement, but that is another topic. To the morally decent that will not bring cheer, but dampen any happiness they have in being so lucky and fortunate and make them grateful. That is the attitude of sinners too - decent ones, perhaps - so how would it not be the attitude of those fully sanctified to love what god loves and hate what god hates. Does that mean that you turn from being a decent, generous soul who is new in Christ to eventually become someone who loves the idea of good people burning in hell? I think not.
The point is this: when we (assuming we get there) are in heaven, resources would be unlimited - if needed at all - in the way we understand them to mean on earth. So would it matter whether others had less than we did or were condemned to everlasting misery in a lake of fire when we have all that could be possible to have in the first place by being one of the chosen few? It makes no sense that such knowledge would be a much needed 'cherry on the cake' of supreme happiness when we could not be happier anyway just by dint of being chosen. As Jerry pointed out himself too, why would anyone be happier or more grateful in heaven knowing most are in hell when some of these might be their own children or those they were supremely fond of on earth? I should think it would dampen any happinness they might feel, not enhance it.
Calvinist God comes across as a hateful, rather cruel figure here - rather like Calvin himself - and this description of his character could halt someone - except the cruel - in their worship and love for God. I am all for knowing who God truly is, by reading the Bible and not soft soaping aspects of his character, but to describe him in this way strikes me as being totally false and the work of the Devil. Similarly, I have nothing good to say of evangelicals and progressives who call themselves Christian, who downplay and dampen The Word to describe God in a way only they find acceptable as a kind of fluffy Santa Christ permissive figure who allows all sin to be unjudged now he has atoned for the sin of man in the first place (hence, the universalists' position). God is no more the cruel Calvinist than he is the manipulated permissive. I believe in universal atonement and limited application through choice to follow Christ and obedience to Christ's word with the help of the Holy Spirit. It is the only model that makes sense and embraces the Cross and God's total character - from what little I know of it. A conclusion drawn by many who do know The Bible and would similarly testify against the Calvinist depiction of God.
I have come to the conclusion that a chosen theology is often a reflection of a person's own character and background. That, in itself, is dangerous if we are to follow Christ. Christ is not there to align with our own character - whether it be permissive and loving and equity inducing - or cruel, hierachical and exclusive. The whole point of sanctification is to die to ourselves and to give ourselves to God entirely. That means there is no such thing as an [adjective] Christian, be it conservative or progressive. A christian is simply a christian - a follower of christ who allows and strives their character to be more like the God, as described in the Bible so that we may want to worship and adore him for everlasting life and who God can see has repented and will save. I fail to see how that is possible with a God, as described by Calvinists, assuming the picture presented by Jerry here, in this presentation, is an accurate one. Unfortunately, I am unable to confirm that one way or another.
God does not owe anyone the gift of regeneration or the new birth. Also the Bible nowhere says that God loves everyone head for head. Just the opposite:
Psalm 11:5-6 (KJV 1900): The Lord trieth the righteous:
But the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone,
And an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup.
Proverbs 16:4 (KJV 1900): The Lord hath made all things for himself:
Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
@@ThomasCranmer1959 You are setting up a straw man argument. I never said God 'owed' us anything, did I? No.
I believe that God does love everyone because he died for all of our sins on the cross. That was an act of love of huge magnitude beyond all comprehension to even the best of men. Even if we t hink we do comprehend it - intellectually - we just can't. It is too huge. All we can do is be humble and submit.
The Psalm 11:5-6 .This merely states what it says elsewhere in the Bible: that the Lord hates sin and loves righteousness and the wicked who remain in sin will face judgement and condemnation. God is a god of justice not just love. So I fail to see your point here.
Regarding Proverb 16:4. In the new convenant context, which is appropriate because God foreknows everything. It just means that God made man in his image (to be reconciled with him at the end) but due to Adam and Eve, they fell, and his love is universal and includes all - including those who fell from grace and don't repent. That's why God sent Jesus, to reconcile these people with him via the atonement and to repentance so that they could be justified. He knew man could not keep to the law. He foreknew all of this. So the proverb says exactly the opposite of what you meant.....
Therefore, it does not mean that God foreknew and predestined and intended to create wickedness and endorses wicked men to justify leaving the wicked out in the cold, unable to come to repentance, because he only had in mind that a few should be saved from the get go. He made mankind in his image, not just 'some men' who were righteous by his choosing - in his image. There is none righteous, not one. So that would be impossible.
it makes no sense at all, biblically, for God to create the sin and wickedness of man that he so despises and then to hold man responsible for it but then forgives and wants to re-unite with him only a few of mankind (the elect), as pre-destined, whilst leaving those he cast out deliberately to be condemned - all for his glorification. That makes God out to be a monster. That is not God's character at all. This is now Calvinists see God.
You need to accept that God expresses his sovereignty by giving man free will to choose or reject him. That makes him more not less Sovereign because he could still choose to withhold that free will if he chose as well as grant it. Yes, there was a fall but that didn't make mankind totally incapable of responding to his call (the elect) and to be born again. The reason why some don't answer the call is due to the very restrictions that beset everyone regarding any choice we make: 1. ---- The elect in Romans 9 simply refers to those who choose to respond to God's call and be born again.
@@PotterSpurn1 Libertarian free will does not get God off the hook. If God foreknows that you will backside two weeks from now and go to everlasting hell is it possible that you won't go to everlasting hell? Second, is there libertarian free will in heaven? Maybe in heaven you will decide to go to hell since libertarian free will means you have nothing to determine which choice to make between two choices. Without determinism responsibility is impossible. Why don't you rob banks? Are you really free? Or does God's predetermined consequences incline you to not rob banks?
@@PotterSpurn1 God hated Esau before he was ever born. And the text says the reprobation was not based on foreseen good or evil. Whatever God does is right. Ezekiel 36:26-27. God could just as easily given Esau grace and regeneration and caused him to walk in His statues. Pharaoh is another example. If grace, otoh, is resistible then God cannot save anyone at all. Your position is essentially Pelagianism. You must save yourself....IF you can.
Adam had no libertarian free will prior to the fall and AFTER the fall Adam was a slave to sin. Whatever God does is right and Jerry Walls is a blasphemer in danger of hell fire.
God does things that you say is unjust:
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 (KJV 1900): 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
So doesn't God open their hearts instead?
Acts 16:14 (KJV 1900): And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. Acts 16:14 (KJV 1900): And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.
You have problem here because this is particular grace, not common grace.
It was never God's intention to save Ahab. God predestined Ahab's death and guaranteed his everlasting damnation:
1 Kings 22:21-23 (KJV 1900): And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him. 22 And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so. 23 Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.
If God loves everyone without exception why is any single person in hell at all? You have a contradiction here. Apoarently God does not love everyone after all.
@@PotterSpurn1 It is not a strawman because by your own admission you must save yourself from your own slavery to sin. Good thing you are apparently better than everyone else. You did the right thing and they didn't. You should be proud of yourself. Ephesians 2:8-9.
Matthew Hart gets that perspective about gratitude from the Bible.....Romans 9:22-24 says "22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory- 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?" Alot of people just don't like what the Bible teaches....so they blame John Calvin for it....smh
"and if you're a Calvinist, you should be a universalist...."
I can't make out what he says immediately following this at 53:04 , but if he genuinely means this, just for the sake of proving his argument about why they're wrong doctrinally, logically inconsistent, etc., that makes me really sad to hear as a believer. He seems to make light of a situation that he paints as a real widespread issue among Calvinists.
Aren't we still united through Christ, despite how one might feel after listening to this lecture? I understand the opposition to Calvinism, despite being aligned with it at this point in my faith as a relatively new believer, but this lecture seems divisive. I also recognize this isn't preaching, or even teaching in a local church body context, but I still just have a hard time justifying what seems to me to potentially fall under the category of "causing divisions".
Romans 16:17
"I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them."
Titus 3:10
"As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,"
Unless Dr. Walls believes men like John Piper, John MacArthur, etc. are false teachers, in which case maybe the divisiveness that I'm perceiving would not be inter-Church division, because he doesn't believe them to be Christians in the first place. Regardless, I have a really hard time reconciling the original quote at the top, assuming I hear him correctly in the video. Saying that someone who professes Jesus should reject him (Universalism) in order to be logically consistent? Is this edifying to the bride of Christ?
Concerning this;
Melchizedek, King - Priest - Messiah and the ransom for many.
The whole idea of Ransom is to find an equivalent to fit the ransom demand.
In our case the only equivalent would be a greater life and thus we find Jesus fulfilling this demand as a Priest after the order of Melchizedek and the power of an endless life.
In the act of his self-sacrifice and in accordance with his father's will. The ransom is paid (in more than full) and all the forfeited lives of sin are redeemed.
No earthly King could ever solicit such devotion, loyalty and love from his people.
That's why the Son of Man is KING of Kings.
Take time to express gratitude and thankfulness in offering a sacrifice of praise to Him who full-filleth all and all.
For he is our God and we are his ransomed / redeemed people.
O' the redeeming love of God in Christ Jesus!
Now an:
Ode to the Great Melchizedek, King of the Most High God.
From earth, to sun, beyond the stars
We see thy spender from afar
With fainting breath, a fading eye
We know Eternity draws nigh
Beneath, above, beyond the sky
We see thy face, thy August Eye
In silent chorus we refrain
While in our hearts we whisp thy name
We bow our heads in reverent dread
You sent your Son, you raise the
dead
Turn down our hearts, adorn thy bed
Thou hast a place to rest thy head
O' Seraphim O' Cherubim
Thrice Holy hymn enjoin
Eternal light, Almighty friend
In Endless love, we say Amen!
JS 2017
Further thoughts
Daniel saw the statue with a head of gold with its historical import.
John sees a vision of Jesus in the ascended, exalted Melchizedekian office as the King Priest with a living voice like a feast trumpet speaking pertinent things for the moments at hand.
Saul in his Throne Vision Call on the road to Damascus must have seen the glorious piercing light of this Melchizedek as he rules and reigns
And I might add, He continues to Rule and Reign for all Eternity even unto the Ages of Ages Amen!
Thanks for all the work you do.
How does he react to God instruction on wipe out the Amalekites, loved Jacob & hated Esau, drowned all of Noah's contemporaries, condemns two men who "love" each other, instructs slaves to serve their masters, allows death of Job's children, instituted patriarchy...it's a slippery slope
@ 18:32 Calvin is wrong about God making sheep out of wolves. What do you really think Acts 10 was about? Was this nothing more than God telling Peter it is OK to eat non Kosher food? Acts 10:9 "On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour:10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.16 This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven." If you look at this passage as nothing more than Peter's struggle over eating non Kosher food I think you missed a really really DEEP principle here. God has taken the profane gentiles represented by every breed of critter on the surface of the earth and sanctified them all making them all potential candidates for eternal salvation and incorporation into the Body of Christ. Jesus offers eternal life to every breed of gentile cat & dog and crayfish or carp wolf chicken duck pheasant peacock rabbit squirrel possum mountain lion worm bird dolphin insect moth bat etc out there. I really doubt if the meaning of this is OK Peter eat non Kosher food. I believe God is able to take every person just as they are and with their unique skills as gentiles or Jews and baptize them into the Body of Jesus Christ fill them with the Holy Spirit and cause them to function in their own unique manner within the Body of Christ. No Calvin I do not believe God is turning wolves into sheep but he may be using them as sheep dogs or in some other beautiful way that fits and functions within the Body of Christ. I think Calvin's understanding of the Body of Christ and how God sanctified the gentiles as candidates for salvation is both cruel and evil. God does not turn goats or wolves into sheep but rather upon them receiving Jesus Christ incorporated them into His body with their own unique creative characteristics causing them to function beautifully and uniquely in the Body of Christ under the control and discipline of the Holy Spirit. Calvin has a really shallow understanding of Acts 10.
I believe Jesus would be all over Calvin just like when He was over the disciples for leaven and bread Matt 16:5-12 Carnal interpretation of s more spiritually deep passage in Acts 10
If salvation is only for a few
Then
John 3:16&17 is not true. The whole gospel of god is questionable.
Gospel turns into vain babbling . Not a spiritual exercise.
Calvinist demonstrate no zealous desire to serve as Jesus serves us .
If i offer you a gift - its no good to you UNLESS you TAKE hold of it. The gift of salvation must be taken by the one who desires it. Not all men will take the gift because they prefer to remain in their sin.
@@youbewarethelie And some return the gift, and then turn to gifts from other God's falling away from the creator.
@@Tigerex966 So if we are Dead in our Sins, then how can a dead man recieve anything. Ezekiel 36:22-32, 37: 5-6. Peole better quit trying to take God's glory from him by thinking we had anything to do with our Salvation.
Where do Calvinist say salvation is only for the few?
The3 bigger question is why is a Baptist teaching at a Pentecostal school? Hmm...
Yes, Thank you Dr. Walls.👍
if God only give salvation to some Elects, for them are good news, but for non-Elects would be disaster, because they never got a chance to be saved.
When you have entire books, ministries, and public discourses focused on nothing but why “calvinism is wrong”
You definitely don’t understand calvinism and are probably the one everyone should worry about
@57:00 it's beginning to seem that Calvinism is more like a hostage cult, "well, at least I wasn't one of the ones that got shot, I'd better show my appreciation" lest another culling occur.
Adam and Eve must have had free will in the Garden. They had the ability to obey God or not. If not, why did God blame them for disobeying and punish them with the penalty of death? He could have created them to operate on instinct like the animals and they would only have done what instinct caused them to do. God provided a situation of choice for them but did God "predestine" them to sin? The scripture indicates he did not. Their descendants also have the ability to repond to God or not. God knows by foreknowledge what people will do but he does not make them do it.
Focus on john 3:17 .
Jesus words !!
Sure, now go to John 17:9
If GOD is sorrowful about humans being damned, what? Does He not give a rat's ass about the Devil and his angels being damned? No. We maybe put too much emphasis on humans. GOD only loves Himself - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
God is totally holy, then why is He so lax in enforcing His own laws?
In Deuteronomy 17:17 God COMMANDS the king shall not multiply to himself wives and yet, He did not even send one word of rebuke to David or Solomon for their shitloads of wives. In fact, thru the prophet Nathan, he ENABLED David to break His own law in Deuteronomy 17:17, by giving David all the former king Saul's wives and concubines.
So, God hates fornication, and created marriage for one man and one woman. Why then did He turn a blind eye to David and Solomon's CONCUBINES?
Why should I repect God's law as a solid foundation of rock when God Himself does not?
Its simple... God has chosen to chose what He choses to do......
44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.
A traditionalist does not think man has the ability to come to God on his own, but that "the power of the gospel" is the means by which God calls those to Him.
@@justgopherit3454 So you believe God calls the elect and they come?
@jennifer williams What's your point and who doesn't agree with this verse? It doesn't teach calvinistic inability. No where does it says unless the Father draws them, and He only randomly draws a very few". As a provisionist, I have no problem affirming this truth. The Father has NO obligation to draw anyone. He chooses to draw them. If he chose not to draw them, they could not come. Yet he gave the Holy Spirit to convict THE WORLD of sin. This is how we are drawn. Once drawn, we can receive the free gift of salvation, or reject it. Drawing could be better understood as wooing or pleading; like a courter would draw his intended, or a parent would plead with a wayward child. There is nothing in that verse that necessitates limiting the number that are drawn!
@@thekriskokid “It doesn’t teach the Calvinistic inability”
Genesis 2:17
[17] but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Read that again, “you shall surely die”
What can a dead man do?
Harmonizes with Romans 3:10-18, wouldn’t you say.
John 6:44-45
[44] No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. [45] It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me-
The scripture does not say God draws and those he draws have the opportunity to choose God or condemnation.
Scripture does not quote Jesus as saying I will try raising him up on the last day.
Romans 3:10-18 harmonizes beautifully with John 6:44-45 and Genesis 2:17 above.
[10] as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
[11] no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
[12] All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
[13] “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
[14] “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
[15] “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
[16] in their paths are ruin and misery,
[17] and the way of peace they have not known.”
[18] “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
John 3:19
[19] And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.
John 5:21
[21] For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life
to whom he will.
John 6:35-39
[35] Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. [36] But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. [37] All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. [38] For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. [39] And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day.
“and He randomly draws a very few”
Sorry, you are making this up, I have never heard a “Calvinist” claim “a very few”
Genesis 15:5
[5] And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”
“Once drawn, we can receive the free gift of salvation, or reject it.” This is your personal theology and is not scriptural, Jesus did not say they will come and I will try to raise them up on the last day. John 6:44
[44] No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And “I will raise him up on the last day.” Not maybe, hopefully raise them up on the last day.
“Drawing could be better understood as wooing or pleading;
Absolutely not scriptural. John 6:45
[45] It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me- Not and they have a chance to come to me or hopefully they will take head and come to me or maybe they will see the logic in coming to me.
“Limiting the number that are drawn”
Read above, I quoted John 6:44 in context of all scripture.
Abrahams offspring are as vast as the stars and the grains of sand by the seashore.
Hebrews 11:12
[12] Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.
This eliminates your false doctrine of “few”.
@@thekriskokid “He only randomly draws a very few”
According to scripture it is the provisionists that limit to a very few, actually the number would be zero. Man is DEAD. What choice can a DEAD man make? None.
Genesis 2:17
[17] but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Read that again, “you shall surely die”
What can a dead man do?
CHAPTER II. Of God, and of the Holy Trinity
There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will, for his own glory: most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him; and withal most just and terrible in his judgments; hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.
So much for Shorter Catechism Question 2. That is a children's Catechism, Jerry.
There is no FREE WILL in a personal atonment model. It is not a question of limited vs unlimited atonement @ all. With any model of PERSONAL ATONEMENT it is TOTALLY DETERMINISTIC. The debate over a LIMITED vs UNLIMITED model of PERSONAL ATONEMENT is IRRELEVANT. Either model will become DETERMINISTIC. The ONLY model of redemption that offers FREE WILL in any sense whether it is the Insecure ARMINIAN U KEEP IT U LOSE IT Wesleyan/Nazarene model or Baptist U take it God keeps it 4 U MODEL while of you gain or lose rewards FREELY is an IMPERSONAL UNLIMITED ATONEMENT. AN IUA MODEL requires far more LABOR on the part of Jesus Christ than any PA Model. The idea here is that Jesus Died for the sins of an UNLIMITED NUMBER of PARALLEL REALITIES "UNIVERSES if you will" while allowing the world & the inhabitants thereof to personally choose the only one that is presently EXTANT. This is the best way I can phrase this model today. if Jesus ONLY Died for the sins we will commit then our choices are limited to the limits of God's grace ALONE. A way of expressing this is SUPPOSE God gives CHARLIE the choice to marry Abigail or Zelda is the choice AUTHENTIC or PREDETERMINED that Jesus only died for the offspring of Charlie & Abagail or the offspring of Charlie & Zelda? What then does sin have to do with this? What then if Charlie marries Zelda and fornicates with Zelda resulting in an illegitimate offspring? What if Charlie chooses to remain S1ngle? Are the choices sinful or legitimate Charlie has REAL OFFERS from God or are all the choices PREDETERMINED by Jesus only paying for the reality and not the possible alternate realities?
I do sincerely hope AW Pink made it to heaven. But i will surprised to see him there.
The best thing about calvinism is that the vast majority of calvinists don't really believe it. It appears AW Pink actually did.
Quoted sayings here and there. meh.
There is nothing wrong with Calvinism,cos it is biblical
Don't forget that Arminism is just the other side of the same heretical coin!
2 verses in the Bible commonly misunderstood and misinterpreted are I Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9......I Tim 2:4 means that God desires that ALL kinds of men to be saved; not ALL men to be saved.....Its the same word where it says that the love of money is a root of ALL kinds of evil; not the love of money is the root of ALL evil. And ALL kinds of men will be saved in that heaven will be represented by all nations, tribes and tongues..... on 2 Peter 3:9 you have to look to the first verses of I and II Peter and they say that they are addressed TO GOD's ELECT. So 2 Peter is saying that God desires that NONE of the ELECT shall perish; it is not saying that God wants to save ALL men. God did not desire for Hitler to be saved ; for example.....nor the Antichrist; nor the false prophet....etc.....God wants ALL His Elect sheep to be saved; and they will be; not one more and not one less. Jesus clearly said that ALL the Sheep get saved......John 6:37-39 "37 All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day."
You made it well.Thats how people should view it.ALL doesn't mean every mankind but ALL means specific persons,-the elect.
Apostle Paul writes "Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead.....This my gospel, for which I am suffering....
Therefore, I endure everything for the SAKE OF THE ELECT(specific persons), that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory"(2Timothy2:8,9,10)
Apostle Peter also says "To God's elect(specific persons), strangers in the world, scattered throughout..., who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father..."(1Peter1:1,2)
Then how do you resolve,
CALVINIST CONUMDRUM
1. God truly loves all persons.
2.Truly to love someone is to desire their well being and to promote their true flourishing "as much as you can".
3. The well being and true flourishing of all persons is to be found in a right relationship with God, a saving relationship in which we love and obey Him.
4. God could determine all persons freely to accept a right relationship with Himself and be saved.
5. Therefore, all will be saved.
Since all will not be saved on the Calvinistic view, which premise would you claim to be false and why?
To say that "all" means "all kinds" is a re-write of scripture...very dangerous.
When davidochienbuoga (actually Paul) says "Therefore, I endure everything for the SAKE OF THE ELECT(specific persons), that they too may obtain the salvation", Paul has to be talking about those who "are going to be" elect". Why??
Notice that the words are "that they MAY obtain"...and they would be saved by grace through faith.
Realizing this keeps all scripture consistent and then you don't have to change the scripture to fit your narrative.
Also, because that would mean that God couldn't save them without Paul's help. On Calvinism, God only needs to zap them with that "irresistible grace" and then they'll be saved. On their interpretation, their salvation is foundational on the work of Paul and not of Christ.
@@TheGuy.. RC Sproul does a great job of answering your question in the following 9 minute video.....good question.....ruclips.net/video/-wvQItCT_PI/видео.htmlsi=HBpsirvY2ATZtjPT
@@TheGuy.. its the same greek word where Paul says that "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil." Not the love of money is the root of ALL evil; which is silly...we know that its not the root of ALL evil
@@TheGuy.. And the idea that God wants to save All men is just ridiculous. Did God choose Israel? Amos 3:2 .....Were not the Jews God's chosen people? Did God choose the Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Babylonians for salvation? How did they get saved?
Greetings in Christ Jesus! Old saying? WHAT CAN'T SPEAK CAN NOT LIE! The fact that in the Institutes of John Calvin Gods LOVE! is not worthy of a mention once from the beginning to the end speaks volumes, or should I say "doesn't speak" ! Yet throughout the Bible the theme is Gods Love! Could any of us produce such an exhaustive work such as the Institutes about God the Father, our Savior Christ Jesus, and The Holy Spirits attributes ,and not mention their Love even just once? Something seriously wrong in his theology on this basis? May God bless us all in the Faith! Hope! and Love! that is in Christ Jesus! Kindest Regards to all from the UK!
Slander is hate!!!! However much we may be sinners by our own fault, we nevertheless remain his creatures. However much we have brought death upon ourselves, yet he has created us unto life. Thus he is moved by pure and freely given love of us to receive us into grace. Since there is a perpetual and irreconcilable disagreement between righteousness and unrighteousness, so long as we remain sinners he cannot receive us completely.
Therefore, to take away all cause for enmity and to reconcile us utterly to himself, he wipes out all evil in us by the expiation set forth in the death of Christ; that we, who were previously unclean and impure, may show ourselves righteous and holy in his sight. Therefore, by his love God the Father goes before and anticipates our reconciliation in Christ. Indeed, “because he first loved us” [1 John 4:19], he afterward reconciles us to himself. But until Christ succors us by his death, the unrighteousness that deserves God’s indignation remains in us, and is accursed and condemned before him. Hence, we can be fully and firmly joined with God only when Christ joins us with him. If, then, we would be assured that God is pleased with and kindly disposed toward us, we must fix our eyes and minds on Christ alone. For actually, through him alone we escape the imputation of our sins to us - an imputation bringing with it the wrath of God…
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960), 2.16.3-4
@@MariusVanWoerden :I thank Jehovah God daily FOR keeping my soul and spirit free of Calvinism, Armenianism, Catholism , Arianism or any other man made system of theology out there .Just give me the plain and easy to understand Holy Word of God and I am fully prepare and equipped to understand Jesus Christ Gospel and be saved!.I have never read and will never read the writings and opinions on soteriology by J.Calvin, C.T.Russell, The Pope, E.G.White, J.Piper, Joseph Smith, M.B.Edith or James White.THEIR WRITINGS ARE NOT RELEVANT NOR IMPORTANT FOR MY SALVATION, ONLY THE WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLES AND THE TEACHING OF JESUS CHRIST ARE 100% RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT TO BE SAVED!!!!
@@ipaporod What's Wrong With Calvinism, What are you doing here then, listening to Jerry Walls and his Armenianism, Catholism. His idea has nothing to do with Scripture. That is what the reformation did bring Scripture back in the church of the money and power hungry church of the pope.
@@MariusVanWoerden :100% correct , the reformation brought back the Gospel to the people but along with the reformation came many heretical doctrines and false teachers. Many of these heresies have survived to this day, History does not lie!!!.
@@ipaporod The problem with you is that you don't know history. The heresy and lies are right here in this video. 20 to 40 M died because of their faith of justification of the ungodly by faith alone by grace alone. You are the one engaging in Heresies.
Justification is a work of God the Father and the Holy Spirit in us and without us. Justification and faith do not have a sequence in time but in order Faith- Justification but are simultaneously in time. Sanctification is a work of The Holy Spirit in us but not without us. Justification and sanctification cannot be separated. There is no sanctification without justification or justification without sanctification, this even when sanctification is just a begin of regeneration through all our life. Faith is by Grace and the free gift of God. Martin Luther said: “This gospel blessing of Grace alone” will be for a short time, and come under attack from every side. One generation after Luther; Arminius came with his damnable heresy denying Romans 3 the Total depravity of men. Which is the root of all heresies and goes together with denying the supremacy of God. Martin Luther wrote: The Bondage of the will” It was in response of Erasmus’s “Discourse on Free Will”
Predestination is a biblical doctrine, You see, without predestination, you would have no Bible. The Word is Eternal!! Judas was predestined to betray the Lord. Abram was chosen out of Ur of the Chaldeans (Gen. 12). Israel was chosen out of all the nations of the earth. A new Israelite remnant was chosen after their exile. The Apostles taught predestination (Rom. 8:28-39; 9-11; Eph. 1; Phil. 1:6; 2:13; 1 Peter 2:5-10). 8
If you seriously want to know the true read this nopeacewithrome.com/tag/monergism/
Walls is an expert at cherry picking the Shorter Catchism. The Edinburgh edition of the Westminster Standards says God is loving in several places:
II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father;
CHAPTER II. Of God, and of the Holy Trinity
There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most righteous will, for his own glory: most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek him; and withal most just and terrible in his judgments; hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.
Your version of God is not in the slightest way loving. No conception of God which includes unconditional election is loving. Shouting to the rooftops how glorious your God is doesn't change the fact that it is 100% completely immoral to unconditionally elect someone for eternal happiness and unconditionally elect someone else for eternal torture. No amount of thumping your Bible will change that. Saying "God is God and can do whatever He wants" is the usual response, which is laughable. Hitler had the power to do whatever he wanted, so did that make him loving to send Jews to concentration camps? Germans were elect, and Jews weren't, one chosen to live and the other chosen for damnation. Your God is Hitler.
@@patrickbarnes9874 The question is how do you define God and what is the source of your propositional information which defines God and His attributes? Also, what is your definition of love? You seem to be more in agreement with atheism than the Bible. Would a loving God do x y or z? Would such a God kill the entire human population excepting 8 souls in a great deluge?
And would such a God torture the wicked in hell for everlasting time in the hereafter? The Bible teaches both.
@@patrickbarnes9874 If Hitler had the power to do moral good and knew the Gospel, why didn't Hitler want to do good and save the Jews so that he would go to everlasting joy in heaven instead? After all he had the power to send himself to heaven, right? And lastly, is there libertarian free will in heaven? Could Hitler change his mind in heaven and fall from heaven to hell? Why or why not?
@@patrickbarnes9874 Most of Walls' arguments are strawman fallacies which completely ignore the Bible and/or the actual doctrines deduced from the Bible logically by Calvinists. I do think Walls was correct when he said A.W. Pink was a consistent Calvinist. Piper and others are less rational and logical.
If God foreknows that you will go to church next Sunday, is it possible that you won't go?
@@patrickbarnes9874 WCF 2.1 Says that God is "most loving". So how does a rational person quote the children's Shorter Catechism and pretend that the Westminster Divines did not believe that God is love? 1 John 4:7-8? Also the sole authority according to the WCF chapter 1 is Holy Scripture. Our beginning axiom is not human opinion but the infallible and inerrant and inspired Word of God. Asbury Seminary does not teach plenary verbal inspiration. Rather the faculty there is in agreement with partial inspiration.
My Brother said that not all people are going to Heaven that God doesn’t save anyone
God loved all creation so much that he sent the flood and killed the whole human race excepting 8 persons.
What’s wrong with calvinism?
✨calvinism ✨
waste of time debating. calvinist will not change their minds because they know the weaknesses of armininian theology. They believed it for a reason that makes sense to them that applies to arminians too. Jerry is just strengthening the convictions of Calvinist. Jesus will be more happy if Christians focus on evangelism instead of mysteries that belong to God alone.
Joseph Alvin Almeda - What we believe about the nature of God will affect our version of the gospel. I know, there should be only one version, but this is the gospel message a I heard a well known Calvinist preacher proclaim to an individual, "God loves you and you can come to him any time you desire." Is that the Gospel? The Calvinist could wash his hands and say he did his part, the rest is up to God, wether or not he chose that person! How pathetic!
You have the right to your beliefs sir and non of us really are heretics as long as we believe Jesus is Lord and the only mediator to God. It didnt affect my evangelism the past 26 yrs serving as Pastor preacher and churchplanter missionary to the Phils where we have planted 2 churches and adopted 2 others. I know debates can be healthy like iron sharpening iron but has to be face to face and done with respect. But theres a lot going on in the internet that I believe only grieves the Holy Spirit. By the way 3 of my pastors in the phils are arminians and I love them and have supported their living allowances for 9 years. I like it when Leighton Flowers called for a love offering for James White after their debate for his muslim outreach and yet how many Christians hate James White. I have spent so many hours listening to both camps debate and like Michael Brown a lot even though He's arminian.
Joseph Alvin Almeda I am not implying heresy but a weakness. I feel Calvinism weakens and cheapens the call to witness and minister.
Many people in many churches do not understand the platforms of what their denominations teach. That is probably a fortunate thing.
I have said nearly the same sentiment as you. Still I desire knowledge but with it wisdom.
Joseph Alvin Almeda P.S. I have a respect for all who share Jesus Christ without reservation and do not Hate Dr White. But I do like heated discussion. I do not mind being challenged in the least. Makes me dig into scripture deeper. I will even debate atheist and have had the pleasure of witnessing one turn to Christ.
Peace in Christ.
My original reply was based on general observations and not your comment. Yes sir I love debates too and digging deep but it is still difficult to comprehensively interpret scripture when there is no single verse that will answer our deep questions directly. I think this is the reason why there are different shades of arminianism and calvinism so its hard to view any theological camp in one category. I have tried to analyze the strenghts and weaknesses of both camps and I still have a lot of questions. LOL. Like for example William Carey is considered the Father of Modern Day missions and yet he was a Calvinist, maybe not a 5 point Calvinist LOL. I think both camps are guilty of arguing based on misunderstanding of other views, also some arguments are sentiments based and will not stand. Maybe thats why there are mediating positions in theology. Lastly my opinion on this video, the title should be changed to " the weakness of Calvinism" instead of whats wrong .... but again all positions have weaknesses. Ive even seen a video with a label Calvinism is Satanic. Anyway nice to chat with you sir and hope one day we shall meet each other if not here in heaven. God bless you.
Oh my, how does it feel to be so powerful that God needs your permission to save you.
God does not need our permission. He has freely offered the gift of salvation to those who accept His offer. The acceptance is not permission
@@justgopherit3454 So, Christ went to the cross to do his part, but mans part is the final act to “really” complete Christ’s work?
@@tricord2939 not at all. Christ's work on the cross is the all in all. But Christ made it clear that His gift is only for those whom accept it. Our responsibility is in no way a part of the work of salvation, but it is a requirement to receive that gift from God. It's really not that hard to understand once you take off the lenses of Calvinism. I know, cause I was one for many years.
@@justgopherit3454 “But Christ made it clear that his gift is only for those whom accept it”.:
Please direct me to this scripture in context of all scripture and of your comment in this reply.
“Our responsibility is in no way part of the work of salvation,”:
Then how is it “our responsibility”?
“But it is a requirement to receive the gift from God”:
A “requirement” to receive a free gift? So if you do this, you get this! That is the wage you earned, not a free gift.
You may want to study your Bible.
“Once you take off the lenses of Calvinism”:
I have never studied Calvinism, and it appears you have never studied Holy Scripture. If you were a Calvinist, could you please tell me what is not scriptural about Calvinism?
@@tricord2939 "believe" or "faith" would have been a better choice of words than "accept", but Ephesians 2:8-9 makes it quite clear that not only does grace come 'through' faith, but also that 'faith' is is not a 'work'.
Colossians 2:12 also shows that 'regeneration' proceeds, and is through, faith.
And sorry, though I've spent a great deal of time studying scripture, I'm not going to go through an entire TULIP breakdown on a RUclips comment. But here's a link to see why I believe a Provisionalist view is much more cohesive to scripture. soteriology101.com/about-2/statement-of-faith/
Maybe I should've gone further, but after 20 minutes, I was stunned at Jerry Walls bad representation of the reformed position. He first quotes someone, sets up his faulty premise about the love of God, then starts quoting Calvin. And again, maybe he did so later, but no Bible verses from the start that clearly talks about God's choosing or election (think Ephesians 1:4-5, Romans 9, John 6:44, etc.) Like many that hate certain doctrines, they attack the name (Calvinism) and the man (Calvin) as if the Bible doesn't have anything to say to the contrary. This is glaring in three ways (perhaps more, but let's just do three).
First, Mr. Walls seems to see everything under a John 3:16 lens, as if the attribute of love is greater than God's other attributes. No, God's attributes are all equal and interconnected. You don't dismiss other attributes because you want God to be nothing but a God of love. This leads to many theological problems (which I will demonstrate in point three).
Second, Mr. Walls shows a quote that God does everything He can. This completely doesn't line up with the sovereign God that says, "But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased." (Psalm 115:3) Or "Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places." (Psalm 135:6) Or "Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it." (Isaiah 46:9-11) Or we could quote the words of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4:34-35 or how the Lord Jesus is the Creator and sustainer of all things for His glory in Colossians 1:15-17. If God only does what He can, He is no longer sovereign or omnipotent. This means He is no longer God because He controls nothing and has to wait on something outside of HImself (His creation) to make something come to pass. This is not the God of scripture.
Third, you will have serious problems saying God is love all the time without explaining what love is from God's perspective, not your own. God is love means love is one of His attributes. We must define His love in light of His other attributes; His holiness, righteousness, power, self-existence, etc. When you separate God's love from His other attributes to make it the greatest or highest of attributes, you will have problems explaining verses like this: (I will capitalize for emphasis, not out of anger or sarcasm) "For thou aret not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee. The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: THOU HATEST ALL WORKERS OF INIQUITY." (Psalm 5:4-5) Or "The Lord trieth the righteous: BUT THE WICKED AND HIM THAT LOVETH VIOLENCE HIS SOUL HATETH." (Psalm 11:5) Or "These six things DOTH THE LORD HATE: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: a proud look, a lying tongue, and HANDS THAT SHED INNOCENT BLOOD. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, FEET THAT BE SWIFT IN RUNNING TO MISCHIEF, A FALSE WITNESS THAT SPEAKETH LIES, AND HE THAT SOWETH DISCORD AMONG BRETHREN." (Proverbs 6:16-19) Notice in these verses God just doesn't hate the action, but He also hates the person doing the action. When you say God loves everyone the same but loves the believer more because he was "wise" enough to choose Him, you do damage to the truth of these verses. In addition, if one person is smart enough to choose God over another to get "more" love from Him because of the wise choice he made, he would have room to boast, which Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks about.
Again, perhaps Mr. Walls explained all of this and I wasn't up to listening to any more, but at this point I find his study of the doctrines of grace lacking. It is easy to demonize Calvin in the mind of believers in order to teach doctrines the Bible speak against. This is bad teaching. And by the way, Calvin himself (if anyone did a study of the man's life) wasn't a perfect man, but he was also not a conceited man. He would never want believers to name a system after his name when the doctrines can be shown in scripture. Just as many call themselves Calvinist to their detriment, those that don't call themselves Calvinist find it easier to attack the man, quote others, etc. instead of making their point through scripture primiarily. I do not consider myself a Calvinist, but there are doctrines that people label Calvinistic that are Biblical. I will not deny the inspiration and suffiency of scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17) because prideful men want to elevate themselves and lower God to just a God of love. Is he? Absolutely. But is it the only attribute He has? Absolutely not.
willpower, what is the context? This is always key when quoting a scripture. When you read "world" or "whole world," you can't assume it is universal. If this is true and Christ died for the whole world, that means the whole world's sins are atoned for. This would mean no one is going to hell to be judged, which is untrue because even Jesus speaks about eternal torment. In John 1:29, it is John the Baptist speaking to Israel primarily, and the fact that he is telling them Christ is the Savior of the world is letting them know that salvation is not exclusive to the Jews alone. God saves those in every culture, yet not everyone. As for 1 John 2:2, the word propitiation means that God's wrath has been satisifed against sin. When it says "our sins," it is talking to the believer. Yet if you think He has satisfied the sins of "the whole world," then that would also include those in hell, which makes no sense since they are suffering from God's eternal wrath. The meaning of propitiation must dictate the meaning of "the whole world" because this word can't mean the satisfaction of God's wrath in one part of the sentence then a potential satisfaction in the second part. This is ascribing a different meaning to the word; this is the logical fallacy of equivocation. Grammatically speaking, we must understand the definition of "the whole world" not to be universal at all, but again, differing cultures and people groups being saved in the world. Also, verse 1 is also key, it talks about how if we sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, then it ends with a colon. A statement after the colon (verse 2) grammatically explains or illustrates what came before it. Only believers have an advocate with the Father.
Finally, while these doctrines may seem offensive, they are not contrary to the plain reading of scripture. Many years ago, I, too, believed what you believed. I was taught this. But the I was always encouraged to read and study my Bible, which I do daily. And the first time I heard the word Calvinism is not from those that believe it, but those I asked about Romans 9 and Ephesians 1:4-5. Yet they never gave me a Biblical explanation for those texts, just demonize Calvinist, which I knew nothing about. This is the problem. Calvin didn't invent the doctrines of the Bible. His name has been used to discourage others to study scripture because they think if these doctrines are true, then God is a monster and they have no free will. Yet there are numerous Bible verses that must be redefined or ignored to avoid the truth of these doctrines. I am not deceived, I'm able to see the verses for what they say and know God is good and in sovereign control. I appreciate your concern (and I'm being serious) because I'm sure you think I'm believing some heresy. May I encourage you to read the scriptures in context and fully to see if these things are true. I sense you have a desire to seek the Lord and serve Him; don't think these doctrines will stop you in doing so. Thank you for your input; I appreciate the feedback.
willpower, did I say in my response to you anything about Calvinism beyond the fact that Calvin didn't write the scriptures. I am discussing what the scriptures clearly say. If I am twisting it, then explain to me the context of John 1:29. Wasn't John the Baptist speaking to Israel? Am I twisting that. Didn't the Jews think they were chosen and the Gentiles were damned unless they became Jewish? Did they think Messiah would be the Savior of the world or the Jews? How about 1 John 2:2? Explain how I twisted it? To make assertions without explanation is again illogical. I could make the same assertions about you. And it's fine to quote 2 Corinthians 11:4 if you show how someone is preaching another gospel. Can you show that anyone that believes these doctrines have preached another gospel? Could you give me a RUclips link that I can look at? Unfortunately, many that hate the doctrines laid out in scripture will give philosophical arguments to make their points instead of discussing the verses given. I have no problem discussing them like I did in my last post. Again, don't just assert that I've twisted something, show me how I've done so. How about this; "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44) "And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father." (John 6:65) Could you please explain those two verses to me because it seems clear by the reading. I won't interpret them at all; how about you explain it to me since I'm a Bible twister. And how about leaving out "Calvinism" as if Calvin invented these scriptues, okay? It is the God-breathed Word and I'd appreciate it if you go to that and explain it instead of spouting assertions about Calvinism. If you respond using Calvinism as your scapegoat to not discuss God's Word, then enjoy getting your last word because I won't respond. No offense, you responded to my post, therefore I answered you. but I don't have time for endless arguments if you don t want to consider studying the verses for yourself.
(Oh, and salvation is of God alone according to Isaiah 43:11, 45:21, Jonah 2:9, Acts 4:12, and Ephesians 2:8-9. The sovereign Lord doesn't need our help to save; it is by Him we are saved alone. He is the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2) and He alone grants repentance (Acts 5:31, 11:18, 2 Timothy 2:25). He chooses from the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4-5). If you disagree, then take the time to reference all the scriptures I gave and show me the "proper" interpretation. But again, if you make blatant assertions without teaching or type the word "Calvinism" to make your point, then I have no need to answer you.)
Eric Smith you need to listen to Part 1
Eric Smith That is a terrible misinterpretation of what you just heard this man say. Calvinist stand firmly fixed on the sovereignty of God above all else.
Piper: a double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
If God wants everyone saved, why have 95% of humans not been saved?
Most sinners want the freedom to jump from evil to good.
Which means that they also want the freedom to jump from good to evil.
Surely, they do not belong in the earth made new.
For the purpose of planet earth is to prove that God is just in keeping Satan
and all his sinners out of heaven. And to do this, sinners very from being
evil as Hitler to being self-righteous as rich Billy Graham.
Satan is the accuser of the brethren.
Are you not being (self righteous)
right now in your condemnation?
We are not told that we cannot be rich.... We are told that a rich man will have a harder time getting into Heaven... because being rich is not for you to be having your best life now --- while others are hungry, and destitute. (I'm NOT talking about those who refuse to work, or who are living a life of debauchery).
There are people who are being oppressed, and exploited, etc ..
The need help, not self righteous
rhetoric.
We are to live out the GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST on earth while we walk in the LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST.
Jerry Walls should open his presentation like this - Please put your bibles away we wont need that for this because I will only deal with quotes and positions I disagree from certain popular Calvinists as I understand those positions and quotes in regards to Calvinism. As a Calvinist I personally was challenged in the pages of scripture and had to rely on passages and texts and the contexts those passages exist in to come to the position I agree with. Every Calvinist listening to this Walls presentation probably cringes as much as I do because we are thinking about all the passages, contexts and texts we have read and wrestled through to come to certain conclusions. I've been watching his presentations and eagerly waiting for him to present the texts that Calvinists use and see how he interprets those texts to refute the Calvinist position. The Calvinistic opposition cant rely on just disagreeing with quotes and certain positions to refute Calvinism. In this I believe he does his audience a huge disservice. In his presentation the scriptures are rarely visited and that is the source of the Calvinist thought.
Too bad God wants all to be saved but He cannot do that because He is powerless against the human will. He also would not be able to bring the Gospel to all people because He depends on men to preach it. He would want to because He loves them all. Of course except Esau and maybe Judas. REALLY?
What is sad is that a so-called reformed 'christian' spends his time trolling non-calvinist resources and forums, displaying his lack of a Biblical and theological understanding.
@@LindsayJackel I would not, if they put a warning: " Truth is not allowed here"
@@MariusVanWoerdenYou wouldn't know the truth if you tripped over it. Interesting that your calvigod isn't sovereign enough to sort out your truth for you. Good thing he has all you calvi boy scouts to do his good deed works!
There is no contradiction for God to choose to manifest His love in the context of free will. There is, however, contradiction in God choosing who He will and will not save through effectual means while simultaneously saying He desires that none shall perish. In this context, God is either a liar or is somehow failing to save people He supposedly has the power to save. I think God is all powerful and genuine with His desires, therefore human libertarian freedom is NECESSARY to preserve both of those claims.
IMO, the problem is that Walls is trying to incarnate God the Father. God the Father is eternal, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient, impassive, etc etc. Everything He decrees is raw Divine Goodness, including election, and that's solely by virtue of the fact that it's Him who decrees it. He has no moral obligations to any human. There's nothing "higher" than Him by which He can swear, He's a law unto Himself.
That's so true. It always amazes me how people try to justify the "atrocities" in the Bible as if they need to. God can do whatever He pleases. If He kills, by definition it is right for Him to kill who he killed. Whatever God says or does is by definition, right. Now, that doesn't mean we can do what God does and it is right, but if God Himself does it, then it is so.
Nothing wrong with it, really. God is God, not man.
Calvinism is the Gospel.
Calvinism is true. This guy is a liar
Im only 7 minutes in and right away I notice a huge flaw. The very texts he is quoting prove nothing against calvanism. #1 in John 14-15 Jesus is talking to his disciples, his chosen. He's not talking to the world or humanity in general. These are orders that he gave his disciples and are valid for believers. These are not instructions to the unregenerate and couldn't be understood by them anyway. In fact in the very same chapters Jesus makes a point to say you didn't choose me I chose you. Sheez way to start out. Anyway I'll continue...
Do you understand that JESUS (CHOSE) HIS Apostles.
Get rid of your Calvinistic presuppisitions, so you can see clearly.
Another big flaw, his whole argument is based on his the big issue is that calvanism is against God's nature of love. This is because of the Arminians distorted view on How God loves. God clearly through scripture shows that God loves people in different ways. Do people love others spouses as much as their own? Or others children as much as their own? Yet he is trying push this Injustice of God has to love everyone equally unless someone rejects God? So if your child rejects you Dr walls will you love that child less than your other children because he rejected you? That's this googly love you slobber over yourself about? So unbiblical and liberal makes me want to puke.
This argument might hold some weight if it wasn't for the fact that the NT was written in Greek, not English. In English, we have only one word for love that can and is used in vastly different ways, as Calvinists have rightly pointed out. However, in Greek there are 4 different words for love to describe the various kinds of love. Yet every time that we find the love of God for mankind, the word agape is used, a word which expresses the unconditional love of God for His children, and the love that we are to have for Him. In John 21 Peter attempts to lower the bar on the love that he has for Jesus by using the word phileo, speaking of a brotherly love. Yet Jesus says no to that type of love by asking Peter to agape love Him, and even questioning Peter's phileo love for Him. Therefore, thanks to the clarity of the Greek language, the objection to various kinds of love does not find Biblical support. "For God so loved (agape) the world..."(John 3:16) "You shall love (agape) the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength" (Mark 12:30).
Remember this verse -
John gospel chapter one defeats john Calvin’s theories .
Defeats Armenian theories .
Defeats peddlers of the gospels .
Defeats bullshit artists .
Far to much philosophy and not enough exegesis of the scriptures. It’s as if the Apostles didn’t know their own Greek language. Sadly more of these “Doctor/ Philosopher/Pastor/Theologian’s” leading people back to works, sacraments and ultimately Catholicism, or Eastern Orthodoxy.
misguided....
Norq Vader
If you’re misguided then it’s probably because you believe in Calvinism.
We can talk about it if you like.
Pardon me but I cannot let this go by unchallenged. In attacking John Calvin and Calvinism this man is exposing his brazen stupidity. His attacking Calvin is a ruse; Let me explain: In attacking Calvinism he is also attacking the brightest and best Christians to ever walk this planet. He is attacking Augustine, John Knox, Martin Luther, John Foxe (author of Foxe’s Book of Martyrs), Matthew Henry, John Owen, Charles Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, John Bunyan (author of Pilgrim’s Progress), John Newton (author of Amazing Grace), William Carey (father of modern missions) William Wilberforce (human rights activist 1859-1833) he was Abraham Lincoln’s hero in his fight to end slavery, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Francis Schaeffer; this to name only a few. All of these great men believed as Calvin believed. Were these men all deceived? I think not. Are we being indoctrinated by a better informed bunch represented here on the internet? Spare me!
I was raised in a Christian home and I was held prey and harassed by this mixture of concocted ignorance. God allowed me to be spiritually sifted for about seven years; I cannot explain the depth of agony that I endured. However, by the grace of God, and in his own good time, he brought me out and away from this brand of stupidity.
I guarantee that if God sifts you, as he sifted me, you will then graduate a Calvinist. You will then fully understand the great truth: That all you are and all you will ever be is by the grace of a sovereign God.
Unfortunately, Protestantism is more deteriorated now than ever. America’s pulpits are peopled with this man’s brand of arrogant ignorance.
However, this is not the end of the story. It remains to be seen what God has in store for his world. “He’s Got the Whole World in His Hands.”
Rhombus of Terror: My question was "Were these men all deceived?" You have to be stupid to even think that. You are proving yourself stupid. I prefer to converse with those with at least some degree of intelligence. I wish to terminate this conversation.
One of the men you held in such high esteem, Martin Luther, had such a strong dislike for the Epistle of James that he called it an Epistle of straw and even went so far as to say that it shouldn't have been included in the canon. While Armenians may have theological differences with your Calvinistic Forefathers, Martin Luther had theological differences with no less than James, inspired author in the New Testament and brother of Jesus. These men you mention were just as human as you and I and we can't elevate them to anything more, or we are making false idols and looking to them as prophets.
Understand what Luther went through to eventually come to faith in Christ and you will better understand his initial problem with James. He battered his body to bleeding; he fasted to the point of death. His confessions to apostate priests lasted for hours, yielding no relief. He had what is known as a deep conviction of God's holiness and his alienation by the filth of his sin. Conviction of sin; what is that? Our generation is destitute, by in large, as to what that means. There is no man living who would be worthy to the shine the boots of those great men who God was pleased to raise up at that point in time. A missionary friend informed me he was reprimanded for using the term repentance in his sermon. That was a church I was formerly dismissed from; a Dispensational church. Another friend was dismissed from a Methodist church for using the word “hell” in his teaching. These new age ego-maniacs make me sick. Evangelicals are apostate and adore attacking sound doctrine. Roman Catholics did the job on our forefathers; evangelical dimwits have now joined the attack.
Another "You are too stupid to understand calvinism". Stop over-complicating the Gospel. John Calvin was not a good man. I do not care how pious his words were. He was a terrible tyrant and guilty of the same horrors of the Inquisition. I am free to disagree with a mere mortal. I have the same Holy Spirit to understand Scripture. I am not saying God didn't use him or save him but he is not the final authority in Scripture. Even the Jehovah's witnesses have ready Bible answers so having all this smart Alec replies at the ready does not speak to their veracity
And Augustine was a Catholic. Whom I disagree with.