Is Calvinism True And Biblical? | A Friendly Debate With A Calvinist
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- Jordan Hatfield talks with David Vandervelde about Calvinism.
Calvinist vs. Non- Calvinist Part 1: • Calvinism Debate Part ...
Calvinist vs. Non- Calvinist Part 2: • Calvinism Debate Part ...
My response to John Piper / Calvinism - Who Are God's Sheep?: • Non-Calvinist Explanat...
Watch more of my videos on Calvinism: • Answering Calvinism (N...
Support the making of these videos by becoming a monthly patron here: / greatlightstudios
or make a one-time or recurring donation to Jordan and GLS here: bit.ly/3nN2nYD
Great Light Studios Podcast: greatlight.pod...
GREAT LIGHT STUDIOS FILMS:
SEEK FIRST (Freedom From Anxiety And Fear)
• Seek First | Christian...
FEAR NOT ONLY BELIEVE
• Christian Short Films ...
METAMORPHOSIS | From Violent Drug Dealer To Jesus Follower
• Metamorphosis | From D...
CONTACT US: contact@greatlightstudios.com
WEBSITE: greatlightstudi...
PODCAST: greatlight.pod...
INSTAGRAM: / greatlightstudios
FACEBOOK: / greatlightstudios
PATREON: / greatlightstudios
PayPal Donation: bit.ly/3nN2nYD
#reformedtheology #romans9 #biblestudy
Nice guy and all, but his naiveté on Calvin's determinism and giving Calvin a pass is painful.
All I’ve heard from him thus far is non calvinism 😅😊
Well said
Trust me I am not naïve on the issues. This was just a conversation since there is plenty of theological dogmatic debates online. I am in complete agreement with the doctrines of grace. I just was mostly talking about how these are applied to the way we deal with it in our daily walk. I think non Calvinists don't have an accurate picture of what it looks like.
The issue is and always has been that taking the calvinistic view to its conclusion results in exactly what Calvin taught. Calvin was somewhat consistent with his thoughts and without outside pressure to conform (since he was already a contrarian against the Catholic church that his teacher broke away from), his raw conclusions are the logical outcomes of this thought process. You cant have your cake and it eat it too. You cannot say God authors all things but also doesn't author all things when sin is involved. You can't say God chooses the will and fate of all men and also preach the gospel to others as if it is a message that is actually a receivable truth (you'd be lying to the vast majority of those you witness to).
We know that it is the god of this world, Satan, that obscures truth from men. Not God.
2 corinthians 4:3-6 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.
@@davevandervelde4799please, please please don't call it the doc. Of grace because its the doc. Of election or how about the doc. of perseverance or the doc. Of determinism.. Because the doc. of grace doesn't have any of those things.
23 minutes in…this gentleman doesn’t understand the Calvinists stance on the doctrine of “the sovereignty of God.
I agree completely that God is not out of control, He is in control. That does not mean He is causing all things. Allowing things is very different.
Your guest was very polite and seemed sincere, but I’m not sure if he realizes he’s not a consistent Calvinist. 😇
The most non-Calvinistic Calvinist I’ve heard in a while. 😉
BTW, I think he was referring to my interview with Brad Saab. Go listen to it and hear him and I both reiterate twice that he was giving his own testimony and that it wasn’t meant to be a reflection of other Calvinists, so that was an unfair assessment of that interview, Dave.
With that said, I did enjoy the conversation and you’re kind demeanor.
Leighton, When are you going to repent and stop spreading your lies about what Calvinists believe?
@@TheBereanVoicecan you be specific on what lies Leighton told?
@@glennjohn3919 Yes, he regularly states that Calvinists believe in causal determinism. That is not our view. God never determines sin in the sense that he puts evil thoughts, desires and intentions in sinners' minds. Additionally, he argues that Calvinists, unlike provisionists, deny the idea that there is abundantly sufficiency in the redemptive work of Christ for any and every sinner.
@@glennjohn3919 I would not consider them lies, just ignorance, if he had not claimed to have been a Calvinist. Any calvinist would know that what he has said isn't true.
Leighton,
If you had every been a Calvinist, you would know that Dave believes exactly what confessional Calvinists believe. It is clear that you don't have a clue.
My biggest problem with Calvinism is that it seems to fundamentally change the GOSPEL. Salvation per Calvinism is dependent on being elect. If you are not elect, there is no way you can be saved, and salvation becomes almost a gnostic “knowing” that you have been chosen; what Jesus did on the cross becomes if not superfluous, at least secondary. The true gospel is only by faith in Jesus’ death for our sins on the cross and His resurrection. The true gospel is good news for EVERYONE. The gospel of Calvinism is good news only for the elect - it is the worst of news for the non-elect.
I have never heard a Calvinist to tell a non-believer what he truly believes - that if you are not elect, there is no way for you to become saved, and you are condemned eternally in hell. In contrast, Jesus offers the hope of salvation freely to EVERYONE (although most will sadly not choose to accept it). Calvinist’s desire to exalt God’s sovereignty is admirable, but in doing so, I believe they have twisted the gospel of Jesus.
@jasonr9678 This very point is why most calvinist fall into the amillenial or post-millenial camp. They believe all of that has already taken place or has been taking place over the course of history post-Christ.
Slippery slope to be sure.
@jasonr9678 Understood. So you say that none of what was mentioned (in reference to the delusion sent by God) has happened yet, just to clarify where we stand on that.
What does the strong delusion that is sent in the future prevent people from understanding?
Specifically in reference to 2 Thessalonians 2:9-11 I assume - "Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:"
@jason9678 So your synopsis of a verse that claims that God sends a strong delusion so that those who rejected the love of the truth that saves will then believe a lie is that they couldn't believe beforehand anyway? So God sends a strong delusion so they will "continue" to believe a lie that they already were predisposed to beleiving? That's not what it says at all. It certainly does not imply it by any stretch of the imagination. It says in scripture that evidence of God's existence is seen in what has been made, and that God's law is written on the heart of every man so that we are without excuse (Romans 1:20 and Romans 2:12-16). So it's not like we are dealing with a situation where people prior to the reveal of God's wrath didn't know he existed and now a special supernatural veil beyond whatever else you believe restricted them from coming to the gospel beforehand.
The very mention of God taking action and then thereby blinding them to the truth directly to prepare for the end and second coming of Christ is a fairly rational reason to believe that prior to that unique action that God took around the end of the age that those who rejected truth did have a chance to believe. If they didn't, what are they now? Deluded-er? Why would God need to send a strong delusion to confound those already predisposed to being confounded?
I'm just not sure I follow your point here. You are making quite a few presuppositions right out the gate without really offering any proof text. "Well we know God already chose people for salvation so (fill in the blank)" isn't really a way to study 2 Thessalonians. Obviously we can branch out into other theological points surrounding Calvinism, but in terms of this particular issue I don't think it really favors your point of view at all considering God takes special action to "strongly delude" men who you espoused never had the chance to see the truth to begin with. That doesn't really make sense, and only serves as an isogetical point to your predisposed lean towards irresistible grace to even begin to work around.
You then followed up by saying that God can't decree unbelief, but isn't thst exactly what he is doing at the time of sending a strong delusion so that they might not believe the truth? What else would you define that as?
It's almost odd to me that you would reject the idea of God forcibly condemning those who did not believe at the appointed time nearing the end (which is clearly stated as a certain event in the future that will transpire), yet you believe he does so now, something there is no evidence of? Romans 5 certainly expresses that both condemnation AND salvation are available to all men currently;
Romans 5:12 - Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned.
Romans 5:18 So then, as through one offense the result was condemnation to all mankind, so also through one act of righteousness the result was justification of life to all mankind.
As far Joel 2:32 goes which is the only verse offered to go off of. What happens in Joel 2:31? The sun will be darkened and the moon turns to blood. What is this a sign of? Matthew 24:29-31 says that immediately proceeding those signs Christ comes to gather his elect. Who are the elect? Those who have placed their faith in Christ, predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son. So Joel 2:32 states that there will be deliverance in In Mt. Zion and Jerusalem, even among the survivors that God has called.
@jasonr9678 What do you mean he does not decree unbelief? As opposed to what? What verse are you even referencing with that statement? I don't believe he decrees salvation, or unbelief. But if you believe he decrees salvation then you must also believe he decrees unbelief. That is the logical conclusion to that proposition. If God decrees all things to happen and allows no part of human interaction whatsoever, why would you even argue that point? Your response to a single question is so scattered I can't even begin to make sense of it.
So sure, let's focus on one single point. Let's start with Romans 5:18. Explain to me how the "all mankind" who are condemned through one man are not the same as the "all mankind" who are given justification to life. Unless you disavow the idea of limited atonement, in which case we can move on to the next point.
@jasonr9678 So, you are just going to avoid Romans 5:18 then?
I am presenting verses, defending my points with biblical context and trying to explain what appears to be a fallacy within your line of thinking. Your comeback to this, while completely ignoring the only verse I asked about is to reduce my argument as the ramblings of an "unregenerated" mind. Unregenerated meaning it comes from a mind not saved by Christ, correct?
Look, let's get this out of the way directly. I believe Jesus Christ, the son of God, is the prophesied Messiah who was sent by God the Father to dwell in flesh among men to be delivered unto death to bear the weight and penalty of sin upon himself and through his sacrifice followed by His resurrection 3 days later and through this act we can find eternal life by placing our faith and trusting in Him alone.
If I profess this openly and believe it whole heartedly why would you then say my mind is unregenerated? Because I don't agree with your presuppositions about the nature of election? I have confidence in my salvation because the scriptures say I can.
1 John 5:12-13 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
So please, now that we have gotten that out of the way can we deal with Romans 5:18 as a starting point? It states that through one trespass condemnation came to ALL men (meaning all men are condemned, correct?), but through one act of righteousness, justification came to ALL men (meaning all men are capable of being justified, correct?)
It uses the same word, same context, and used the two illustrations in the same manner to illustrate this very point. I assume you agree that condemnation came to ALL men, but then if that is true then it would fall on you to prove that the ALL men that justification was offered to somehow means only a select few in defense of the doctrine of limited atonement.
That's where we are, just as a starting point. If you don't want to deal with or discuss it, fine. But just pushing me aside as an "unregenerated mind" doesn't solve anything.
This video is hugely important and insightful for the conversation as a whole. Every Calvinist should see this.
That was a good conversation!
Thank you brothers for sharing this.
I have noticed a theme of Calvinism:
Same vocabulary, different dictionary.
But consistent Calvinism collapses under its own conflicting inconsistency.
There is a sort of double-speak that is necessary to hold onto a Calvinist view.
It states a definitive theistic determinism, but the day to day living is done in continually operating a free will state.
Do you believe in the absolute foreknowledge or omniscience of God? Asking seriously for curiosity not accusing anything.
I know you're asking them. If I may? God's foreknowledge of all events, does not mean He is the causal agent of all events. See Jeremiah 19:5
@@mikelyons2831 that's actually not my point. I'm trying to understand his understanding or view of foreknowledge. I didn't say God caused sin. I'm seeing if your understanding of foreknowledge is the traditional Christian view that God is omniscient and knows ALL things past/present/ future perfectly? Or is it open theist or something else?
@@mikegreene9137 I'm not an open theist persay. I believe God is Omniscient with perfect foreknowledge. That said, God interacts with nations, Israel & individuals. Abraham lobbies God to withhold destruction over 50, 40, 30 & so on. God lets Jonah run the other way for a while, he didn't have a California Condor grab him immediately & fly him to Nenivah. He doesn't have to micro-manage us to prove Himself sovereign. God hates divorce & kids get scarred & wounded from it, yet he allows it & can always work things for good in the end like with Joseph rescuing his brothers that sold him from a famine.
@@mikegreene9137 I'm unaware of the term "absolute foreknowledge" in Scripture. Ditto Omniscience. I believe that precisely what goes on in the mind of an infinitely intelligent creator is in the realm of "above my paygrade" so I decline from "intruding into those things which he hath not seen." (Col 2:18).
Check out the infinitive "to know" in Deut 8:2 - "the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart..." If "absolute foreknowledge" means Bible correcting it to say "I always knew" then count me out.
39 minutes in…love this conversation. I commend both of you for your demeanor. David really exemplifies what I mean when I think of most Calvinists to be brothers and sisters, while yet thinking calvinism (emphasis on the ism) is a doctrine of demons from the pit of hell. David is very inconsistent with his Calvinist views. I don’t think he understands what calvinism would force him to believe and when confronted in what calvinism demands, he rejects it as if that’s not the logical conclusion to calvinism. I don’t think he understands just how evil this world view is and I’m glad he rejects that evil. As nice of a guy David is, I could imagine Jordan that you needed a lot of Christ like patience to listen to his many inconsistencies. You did a great job with that. Both of you are doing a great job in expressing yourself and allowing the other to fully express as well.
Also thank you I really think its important to listen and understand whats being said. I think that when I here of people are only realizing that a church is calvinist when they hear 1 or 2 things is taught says we agree on alot more then people are usually led to believe. I agree in some ways that I may not sound consistent but we have to be sure the gospel message we are commanded to share is not conflated with how we understand doctrines of grace. It takes alot of time to go through and use scripture to discuss things. unfortunately a " title " often brings with it some baggage or some misconceptions.
Thanks - I have always appreciated but not agreed with your comments but I think your name says it all.
@@davevandervelde4799 🙏🏻🤗
@@davevandervelde4799 I really enjoyed hearing your heart! It’s nice to actually watch and hear someone instead of just a robotic comment on RUclips. Way more personal. God bless.
Is God speaking a doctrine of Demons when He says - Isaiah10: 5 Woe to Assyria, the rod of my anger;
the staff in their hands is my fury!
6 Against a godless nation I send him,
and against the people of my wrath I command him,
to take spoil and seize plunder,
and to tread them down like the mire of the streets.
7 But he does not so intend,
and his heart does not so think;
but it is in his heart to destroy,
and to cut off nations not a few; .......... 12 When the Lord has finished all his work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, he will punish the speech of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the boastful look in his eyes. 13 For he says: “By the strength of my hand I have done it,
and by my wisdom, for I have understanding;
I remove the boundaries of peoples,
and plunder their treasures;
like a bull I bring down those who sit on thrones. ........ 15 Shall the axe boast over him who hews with it,
or the saw magnify itself against him who wields it?
As if a rod should wield him who lifts it,
or as if a staff should lift him who is not wood!
16 Therefore the Lord God of hosts
will send wasting sickness among his stout warriors,
and under his glory a burning will be kindled,
like the burning of fire.
17 The light of Israel will become a fire,
and his Holy One a flame,
and it will burn and devour
his thorns and briers in one day.
18 The glory of his forest and of his fruitful land
the Lord will destroy, both soul and body,
and it will be as when a sick man wastes away.
19 The remnant of the trees of his forest will be so few
that a child can write them down.
@@stubowl1 I know exactly why you have written this text out but it is not going to help in this situation without having context and a clearly explained meaning of how God is in control.
All of these types of debates over texts are online for everyone to see and study so they can hold it up to see if what they believe is accurate.
I let Jordan take the lead on this video and I just wanted to answer him as best I could. I think that this passage is a good candidate for discussion but I will let Jordan decide.
Just to be honest with you, writing out a text from the Bible and then challenging someone is probably not having the desired outcome.
Thanks for listening and I hope it was beneficial to you.
Again, David’s saying that he believes calvinism is “God is moving towards us first and giving us the ability to respond” while non calvinism is “We are the ones moving to God first and God then responds to us”
I do really love this guy, he’s a dear brother. But non Calvinists believe that God has moved toward or “pursued” or “initiated” all people FIRST which then gives all people the ability to respond (positively or negatively). If this is what David believes, yet again, he believes the non Calvinist position and what I would argue is the biblical Christianity position.
NO, David does not believe that God, in moving toward sinners and initiating the work gives all people the ability to respond (positively or negatively). People are born with the ability to respond positively or negatively. That is not the issue. The issue is that sinners in a state of pervasive sinful corruption have no desire to respond positively to God and the gospel. It would likely be a good idea for you to reserve your comments on these issues until you have a modicum of understanding of the issues involved. Even a fool when he holds his piece is esteemed a man of understanding. That is to say that it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it an remove all doubt.
@@TheBereanVoice I literally quoted David, so yes, that is what he believes
@@Loves2HugItOut You might imagine that David said that God enables all to believe the gospel, but he didn't say that at all. I know David and I know that is not what he believes. He was talking about who takes the initiative in the application of redemption. Is it God who effectuates Jesus' redemptive work or is it the sinner by their free will decision?
@@TheBereanVoice I know. Dave believes God only “moved towards” the certain preselected elect which gives the certain preselected elect the ability to respond positively.
I was just saying that GOD always moves first biblically but He has moved on everyone and everyone then has the ability to respond positively or reject.
@@Loves2HugItOut Inability is a problem of the will. Sinners cannot come because they will not to come. If you are right that everyone has the ability to respond properly, everyone must have the desire to respond properly. Is that what you truly believe?
I like this guy. He’s more Biblical than he is Calvinist. Honestly, he doesn’t sound like any of the renown leading Calvinist pastors or theologians. But for some reason keeps “the title”. I don’t even know if many Calvinists would accept him as a “real Calvinist”. ALL believers believe God is in control…That’s not what what makes Calvinism different.
God bless this brother. Thanks for sharing your testimony with us, Dave! I enjoyed hearing it. In the end, labels are just that. Labels. And people define them differently as is very evident here. This guy loves Jesus and I am proud to call my brother in Christ!! Blessings to both of y’all for this interview and the way you discussed with one another in love
@elaineauo
I am going to go out on a limb and say I don't think you have ever read the Canons of Dort or what actual Calvinists have written.
@@TheBereanVoice Hello friend. I like your handle name "The Berean Voice" :) Amen, may we all be bereans!
Yes, I am familiar with the Canons of Dort, Westminster confession, Calvin's Institutes, and many Calvinist works to be brief.. and I probably listen to more Calvinist pastors/theologians sermons (outside of my own church).. this is because I want to understand rightly what the expert Calvinists actually teach for myself. Not a caricature or a straw man argument. I also visited a strongly Calvinistic church for a few months after moving to my new city, which is how I even got interested in learning what these "Doctrines of Grace"
are. I went to the Scriptures and started studying to see if these things were true. Which started by 2 years (so far) study into Calvinism, decretal theology, etc. So yes, I am very acquainted with Calvinist scholars and their works.
Regardless, despite heavily disagreeing with Calvinism and its system, I have so so many Calvinist and non-Calvinist friends in my life! They love Jesus and we are great friends and brothers and sisters in the Lord and I love doing life with them!
Thank you for your question. Blessings~
@@elaineauo Thank you for your uncommon kindness.
@@TheBereanVoice Thank you for yours. Truth in love :) Blessings, brother!
Around the 34 minute mark ->
"I do believe in election as the Calvinist view of election but that doesn't negate the idea that PEOPLE ARE FREE TO CHOOSE...because the Gospel message is that every man has the ABILITY TO CHOOSE and that is a GOD GIVEN ABILITY.....but God has created us as free creatures. We have the ABILITY TO CHOOSE right and wrong."
If I were debating a Calvinist on Total Inability and heard that, and the moderator said that I had 5 minutes to respond, I would be inclined to ask the moderator if my opponent could have my time to keep making my, err, his point.
"Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord..." indicates that God created us with the faculty to reason, the ability to hear the Word, which is ABLE to make us wise unto salvation (whoever you are.)
I had not read this until now. This is the best comment here by a mile. I got a huge laugh thank you. This is why I quoted John Preston near the end to make this exact point. I think if we get a few things unraveled then we are alot closer then we think. Charles and John Wesley and George Whitfield come to mind.
"Go and tell everyman without exception that there is good news for him. Christ is dead for him. We preach Christ crucified since Jesus Christ is able to save to the uttermost al that come to him. He promises to save all who come to him".
John Preston
I’m so excited to watch this in person friendly debate/conversation. So much can get lost in translation going back and forth in RUclips comments. We also don’t get the expression or tone of the other. It’s just so much more well rounded this way. Very excited.
Very true...and while doctrine is important, so is the love and grace that we are called to share with one another as brothers/ sisters in Christ. Unity in Christ is even more important than uniformity in doctrine (over things that aren't essential to the faith). I hope we can come to agreement on these issues one day, but until then may God be gracious to us all as we struggle through these matters.
And I do ask forgiveness when I respond to people impatiently for where I feel they mock or misrepresent our beliefs. God bless you.
@@mikegreene9137 🙏🏻
Yes, that was cordial & God honoring. As a Dad, Granddad & Pastor in my 60s I'm still learning the balance of patience, kindness & passion for truth. It's easy to blow your cool on faceless threads.
That said, IMO many are not aware of the harmful ramifications of this doctrine of men/another gospel.
"I don't know how you can believe in a God who wants to condemn most of the planet to a fiery Hell" (Quote from NFL QB Aaron Rodgers in People magazine) All he knew was the God of Calvinism & not the Heavenly Father of scripture, whom sent His Son to redeem, ransome & forgive any, all, everyone whosoever will call upon Him & all can call upon Him. He has not forbidden anyone from the gift of grace.
@mikelyons2831 what church or denomination are you affiliated with pastor?
@@mikegreene9137 Non denominational. I'm no longer full time, I sub for Pastors when feeling ill, vacationing, on mission trips, etc. & do guest speaking.
Great job to you both in being cordial and thoughtful in your discussion.
Do you think, as many here do, that he's literally not a calvinist? Or simply that he insists on a certain rhetorical arrangement that deemphasizes the top down deterministic lens in favor of his allowance of evil in the present, ignoring the causal chain from decree to the present evil as being either unexpressed or a mystery or misnomer?
What's your take?
@@ravissary79 - Of course he is a Calvinist. I didn’t get the sense that he deemphasized anything. He shared his perspective honestly.
@@brentonstanfield5198 think the one place where he seems to "blow it" (I don't think he messes up very much... he's careful)... is when he offers a definition of Total Depravity that every Arminian and most provisioists would agree to... as he doesn't mention moral inability to believe, but does define it as unable to obtain favor from God through works.
That seemed like a pretty major *woosh* moment.
By deemphasize I mean how he disagreed with the wording of Pipers blunt determinist take, but didn't want to disavow Piper in the process. He's not disagreeing totally, but he's rhetorically deemphasizing that harsher looking top down view, instead focusing on God's activity in the moment which looks more like "permitting".
Thanks Brenton!
@@ravissary79 - On total depravity he read a classic definition of total depravity from a book on Calvinism. He properly pointed out that Jordan sometimes conflates the eternal perspective with the temporal. Is there a point in this video where you think he improperly addresses the issue of "determinism"? What I tend to find is that non-Calvinists dislike when Calvinists don't use THEIR language to describe what they believe. I think what he said speaks for itself.
The guys like Piper etc are not “trying” anything. They are SAYING it. My pastor said “there are no such thing as possibilities, nothing can happen other than what happens.” That’s clearly saying all things set in stone. God causing all things.
Just read this and I am not sure what you meant. If it was something I said maybe I can clarify.
Unless you are willling to deny God's perfect knowledge of all that will occur in time, you will have to acknowledge that all that He has known will happen is certain to happen. If something happened that He did not know perfectly would happen, His knowledge would have been imperfect. It is set in stone. Does that mean He causes all that occurs? Of course not.
If God has determined from eternity what He will either permit to occur or cause to occur in His world [either He approved that they would occur or He did not approve that they would occur] then what He has approved will occur, will certainly occur. That does not mean that He has caused all that He has decided will occur. R. L. Dabney wrote, "Knowing the propensity of little lambs to eat grass, I don't need to cause them to eat the grass in the pasture. All I need to do is to leave the gate open." We do not believe in causal determinism. That is a lie that Provisionists tell.
Listened through the end. I think a great many topics here that Jordan has struggled with I have experienced as well. In fact, Jordan’s description of the teaching of God “holding out” on people yet commanding them to repent and believe was near perfectly laid out and was almost exactly how felt lots of Reformed guys were preaching.
However, I think some of this should not be pinned on Calvinists per say, but instead a lack of due care from those teachers in explaining how regeneration and predestination should be applied to a believer’s or hopeful believer’s walk with Christ. We should “believe all things” and not think the worst of teachers in spite their failure to be clear. I think Jordan’s guest said it well - the believe should know predestination from God’s view and that Christ a free gift and turns no one away and is all, in all from our view. Keep those things straight and do not co-mingle the two. This is very difficult for the analytical, the logical, the mathematical - “all things must reconcile!”. Part of this problem comes, I am convinced, from an over-consumption of online theology.
Paul Washer, in my case, was an online go-to for many years for me. His videos can really be greatly encouraging and also cause lots of confusion and suffering at times. I have thought from time to time how his approach can make it seem impossible to get saved in his pursuit to make sure people’s faith is authentic. Then, I would see another sermon where he would say “let’s be careful, let’s not make it too hard”. Super frustrating right?
Ultimately, I love what Jordan’s guest says - “I am just trying to live a faithful life”. Obsessing over theology can be a sin. We should not take our eyes off of Christ
I decided to read a few new comments. Thank I feel the same on all your points. Paul Washer confuses me. At times he makes sense and teaches very clearly. Then at times he starts getting passionate and it can be difficult to listen.
I need to always be aware that I must always be looking to Christ. Doctrine is crucial of coarse and false teaching must be called out but that cant become our idol.
13:45 Sovereignty ... the authority of a state to govern itself or another state... NOT divine meticulous detemination
Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Colossians 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Define meticulous determination
You'll need to catagorize any thing you think that is outside Meticulous Divine Determinism in your definition of Sovereighnty.
@@ManassehJones "God Allows it" is different to "God causing it" as per Deteriminsm. Just becuase God knows, doesn't mean He determined it...... God is not the author of evil... nor wills it like Jonny Mac preaches .... ....There are boundaries, but within those boundaries Scripture tells us to choose/turn etc...... Deuteronomy 30:15-20, Jeremiah 7:31,Ejxodus 32:11-14, Job 1:6-12, Job 2:1-6 When Job is called blameless and upright, was that because He was sinless and effectually caused before the foundation of the world? ..... 2 Timothy 4:7 (I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.) was Paul being proud/boasting/saved himself?? ... Context kills Calvinism
@@unitedstates3068 Did God give you faith in Him by His grace?
@@aletheia8054 this isn't meticulous determinism, this is a Sovereign God as creator... Sovereignty ... the authority of a state to govern itself or another state..... not "sovereign" as determined under calvinism. God is our Judge. What is He judging if He is the determiner..... condeming Himself??? 1 corinthians 10:13 / James 1:13
Good discussion. I'm a little surprised that Romans 8: 28 and 29 was not discussed, since it directly mentions that God foreknew and predestined. "28And we know that God works all things together for the good of those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose. 29For those God foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.…" also Mark 13:27 - And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven and Ephesians 1:4 - According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: and Acts 13:48 - And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed and 2 Thessalonians 2:13 - But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth and John 15:16 - Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you and Ephesians 1:4-5 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he[a] predestined us for adoption to sonship[b] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will-there are so many passages that speak on this that I'm unsure how we can question that doctrine. And then we deal with the issue of free will in that as well. But Dave is right in saying that God's justice is perfect as is his love and mercy and that it is not ours to decide who is or is not elect. And when we understand that our salvation is a gift and not something we can earn, humble and grateful is the right response. What is for us to do is to love God and our neighbours. Loving God means to accept the gift of Jesus sacrifice on the cross and out of our love and gratitude serve him and those around us. As to the discussion on whether God does the evil or allows it, just the book of Job itself makes clear that God is not doing the evil, he is allowing Satan to do it and in Satan asking permission, it's clear that God is the one in control. I haven't read that passage from Calvin before, but I don't think I'd agree with it. Though, we read that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. Anyway, lots to think about.
We will cover all this in part 2. 🥰
Thanks for your gentleness and respect in this conversation. Good modeling here. It was frustrating though to watch someone over and over appeal to mystery while holding fast to contradiction, instead of taking a fresh look at the Bible. keep pointing to the Bible. It is Truth and LIGHT.
It would be fun to count the times I appealed to mystery and then Jordan. I think he did it more but I am not sure.🤔
@@davevandervelde4799 Hi Dave! Thanks for also your kindness and gentleness and willing to discuss these important things. I’m looking forward to the next discussion on Ephesians.
@HJM0409 Next time we will get into a more Biblical discussion. I think we all benefit by being open and loving in this world we live in.
@@davevandervelde597 Definitely! I suppose. But not if you are not elect.
@@HJM0409 😂 I think I've heard this before? 🤗
You can tell the Calvinists in the chat by the way that thy use logical fallacies and abusive behavior. Such a shame.
Hmmm... so does that make you a calvinist? I'm confused now.
I just read through all the comments and saw very few calvinists and none of their comments were abusive. Maybe I missed one.
I have seen ( like yours ironically) some non calvinists make a few abusive comments.
I seem to remember some guy talking about removing a log from your eye before you remove the spec from your brothers eye....
just like you do then?
Why are you surprised, this is the norm everywhere online. Reading through the chat, I saw a couple acting in this way. Brenton's use of foolish questions and then demanding a response to such questions is par for the course. When they cannot argue on theology, they move to abuse.
@@davevandervelde4799 I saw the abusive behavior from the Calvinists.
About half way through and this a great conversation so far. I think there was a point of clarity that could have been made when Dave said that he'd never heard Calvinism tought as deterministic. The concern, I believe, is not whether determinism is explicitly taught by Calvinists, but that the logical implications of Calvinism necessarily imply determinism.
Now that I have seen the video I see were I should have done better.
I have never heard in church that you are simply determined and therefore your future is set. In other words, it does not matter what you do. I only hear determinism as a pejorative against Calvinism.
What Calvinism teaches is that God is not reacting to creation but through our free actions His will always is done. He has an eternal decree. That I believe is evident from His plan of salvation from before the creation of the world.
If we don't believe that then God is necessarily learning and we know that is not possible.
Thanks
The issue is not whether Calvinists believe God has determined what will occur in his universe. We clearly believe that. What we do not believe is that God is the proximate cause of all He has determined will occur. What we deny is causal determinism. God does not cause to occur all that He has determined will occur. There are times that he uses the evil machinations of wicked sinners as the rod or the axe in His hand to bring about His good purpose. He needs to do nothing to cause sinners to act wickedly, but He has determined to use their sinful desires and actions to bring about spiritual and eternal good for His people and eternal glory for Himself.
He asks, is Justice loving? No, justice is Just, is like saying is the color blue sour? They are two different sides of God.
@Great Light Studios
I would enjoy having a conversation like this with you
I can also help you with clarity on how God's will operates within the context of Man's will or vice-versa..
God allows us to make choices.. yet God determines what our choice will be and it's outcome...
examples of this are found at least in 8 verses in Proverbs,,,.
16:1
16:9
16:11
16:33
17:3
19:21
21:31
29:26
Let’s all agree that this question of exactly how salvation works is beyond our comprehension; and get to preaching and living out the gospel to our fellow man.
Let’s stop wasting our time.
I think Proverbs 16:4 would be a great starting point for ANY debate about Calvinism..
"The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."
You determine.. what the "wicked" is and what this "day of evil".. is... and then we can talk...
because this verse has Calvinism written all over it..
God creates evil.. that is part of all things..
but this is Not done on a whim.. it is done so His purposes will be accomplished..
to state God allows evil.. as the Maxim.. part God plays in the role of evil is HERESY..!..
Brother….you are NOT a Calvinist!!!!!
Maybe...I hold to all the doctrines of grace. I intentionally did not want to go deep into the differences between Jordan and myself . I believe there is alot more we agree on that people need to hear. The next video we should be able to unpack more of the doctrines in a very friendly and loving way.
I have watched your story and I will not talk about you or other people publicly since you are not able to defend yourself. This conversation should never be personal.
I do believe the reformed faith has had a tendency to build a fence around itself to shut out the opposing views. This is a problem. My current pastor who is very theologically deep in his understand of all sides of this issue ( he grew up Pentecostal ) came to the reformed doctrines and saw the weak understanding of Biblical doctrines most churches teach.
I will be honest, I dont know the church you came out of but it is disappointing to me that you appear to now dismiss so much that I believe is clearly taught in scripture.
I truly wish you all the best God bless. ( I am jealous, I would like to meet Voddie)
I have watched about 1/2 of this. Just so everyone is aware...I went out and bought a video camera and sat down with Jordan to have a conversation. Never done this before . I had no idea of exactly the questions, I only went in with 1 goal - Listen intently to what Jordan was saying and try to be as focused on answering that as I could. I told Jordan that alot of the time it seems people talk past each other and I did not want that.
So far I see were I should have done better. What you don't see is that I am quite nervous, my brain is going about 150 mph and I am trying to talk at 30 mph.
But I agreed so I better be able to take any comments.
Dave, you did a great job. No worries! Haters are gonna hate 😀 -- I get it all the time.
Dave you remained humble and demonstrated gentleness, kindness, self control, etc. I’m sure the Lord is pleased with the character you exemplified! I think that is what is most important, eternally. Well done. May God bless you for putting yourself out there and remaining honest.
You did great. 100% of my criticism is whether the point of contention is being addressed.
But I'd never have guessed you were that nervous. You seemed fine. 👍
@@ravissary79 Thank you. It got much better as we went I sort of forgot about it and just had a conversation. I could have made some points clearer. 🙄
@@davevandervelde4799 it definitely got clearer over time.
34:35 The man says he 'loves' Piper... but it's as if he's never really listened to what Piper is saying.... He's been deceived. He's denying the unavoidable consequences of Calvinism, unwilling to follow the doctrine to it's logical conclusion.
7:45 "the assurance that he(God) is in control"...At its core, this mindset misdefines sovereignty. The Sovereign, (God)by definition is free to control what he chooses, but not required to control anything. The belief that God is literally controlling everything at all times is a mindset which can be appealing to some. On one hand, it absolves them of responsibility. Calvinists claim to know and proclaim that God is good, but judging from the evil we see, which their system cannot help but claim he is the ultimate cause, it's impossible to explain exactly 'how' God is good within in the parameters allowed in Calvinism.
This is the 'mystery' and the 'tension' with which they've become so comfortable. Those who yield their minds to this premise, while also admitting it makes no sense, try to find it 'comforting'... but it isn't.
However, on the other hand Calvinism actually absolves Satan of any actual responsibility for evil in the world and unavoidably lays "whatsoever comes to pass" at the feet of God. "Whatsoever" covers ...whatsoever. Though they try, it cannot be explained away. In Calvinism, Satan cannot be the enemy of our soul, for the destiny of all souls has nothing to do with him at all.
(Please note that all caps isn't yelling but for emphasis only.)
Enjoyed this, and actually had a response to more, but I only left the one below
Despite general revelation, despite "because that which is known about God is evident WITHIN THEM; for God made it EVIDENT to them (Romans 1:19); despite conscience (Rom 2:13-15); despite the true light enlightening every man (John 1:9); despite Jesus drawing ALL MEN to Himself (John 12:32); despite sending the gospel (too many verses to quote) and THAT gospel being the POWER OF GOD FOR SALVATION to EVERY MAN WHO BELIEVES (Rom 1:16); despite the convicting work of the Holy Spirit (John 16:9).....despite God doing all of this, your guest believes that God STILL NEEDS TO ACT FIRST. I guess God hasn't acted first even though Scripture shows us all the ways that God IS acting first.
Your guest doesn't seem to realize that he is not a Calvinist. No full blown "Reformed" "Sovereign grace"" 5-Point Calvinist Church" would ever accept him. He would be thrown out on his ear!
Truth in Love
They dont throw people out on their ears.
@@davevandervelde4799 Had it happen twice. Dave tell your pastor and elders what you have been saying and watch what happens.
Truth in Love
@@truth7416 Well my Pastor is going to watch it so maybe next week I will be looking for a new church!
I am sorry that was your experience. The problem with church is that it is full of way too many sinners!
@truth 7416 I am a 5 Point Calvinist and I believe he is clearly a Calvinist. I am going to go out on a limb and say I doubt you have ever read the Canons of Dort.
@@TheBereanVoice Yes, I have come across you as a Calvinist troll in the past.
Same BS as always. I don't need to read any document of "CANONS of DORK" to understand a Doctrine of Demons you defend.
You should be ashamed of the damage you do to the cause of Christs salvation to mankind.
You call yourself "TheBereanVoice" It's a warped view of what the Bible describes a Berean to be.
In your case you compare anything Christians say and compare it to The "Deformed 5-Point Calvinist" documents to see if it is true, true to the Cult manuscript.
Then you spew your poison at anyone who tries to help you.
Excellent discussion both of you.
Good job on pushing the points of contention Jordan 💪
Would definitely enjoy a round 2. Maybe you could ask him if God gives "saving faith" to every individual.😉
Thanks for your ministry my brother 🙏
I'm talking with David about doing a round 2 more focused on Ephesians 1. We wanted to talk about that and ran out of time.
@@GreatLightStudios Amazing 👏
Looking forward to it!
Blessings
“Sovereignty” is actually found nowhere in the Bible, and it’s definition in context of Scripture has more to do with self autonomy than tyranny.
Really enjoyed this!
Throughout I felt the Calvinist brother did not accurately represent Calvinism. Also he often did not address the actual points you were making. As a non-Calvinist I found lot of the things he was saying I actually agree with!!
@stevenbabcock5509 Perhaps you thought he did not accurately represent Calvinism because you do not understand Calvinism. I would strongly suggest that you read the Canons of Dort and perhaps read what a multitude of Calvinists have written over the centuries. Have you ever read Calvin's Commentaries or the Institutes of the Christian Religion? No true Calvinist would believe "Calvinism" as people like Leighton Flowers describes it.
@@TheBereanVoice I have read a lot of Calvin’s work. I have his whole digital works on Logos Bible software. Calvin is clear that he believed all things including sin is determined by God. I hear alot of calvinists today dance around determinism. They often try to water it down with compatiblism but it just ends up in contradictions and confusion. I just don’t get why Calvinists won’t just drop the namesake if they don’t agree with what Calvin taught.
@@steven_suave But what do we mean when we say that all things including sin are determined by God. If you read our confessions, you will see that we clearly deny that God is the author of sin in the sense that He allures anyone to sin. I have posted here a lengthy quote from Calvin's treatise on the Eternal Prestination of God, in which he clearly denies that he believes God' causes anyone to sin. Though it is already in this thread, let me quote it for you again.
"Although, therefore, I thus affirm that God did ordain the Fall of Adam, I so assert it as by no means to concede that God was therein properly and really the author of that Fall. That I may not, however, dwell extensively on this great point now, I will only express it as my view, belief and sentiment, that what Augustine so deeply teaches on this matter was fulfilled in God’s ordaining the Fall of Adam: “In a wonderful and unutterable way that was not done without the will of God (says he), which was even done contrary to His will; because it could not have been done at all, if His will had not permitted it to be done. And yet He did not permit it unwillingly, but willingly.” The great and grand principle, therefore, on which Augustine argues cannot be denied: “That both man and apostate angels, as far as they were themselves concerned, did that which God willed not, or which was contrary to His WILL; but that, as far as God’s overruling omnipotence is concerned, they could not, in any manner, have done it without His will.” To these sentiments of the holy man I subscribe with all my heart. I solemnly hold that man and apostate angels did, by their sin, that which was contrary to the will of God, to the end that God, by means of their evil will, might effect that which was according to His decreeing will."
The problem is that when you read, "decreed," you imagine that it means "caused." That is not what Calvin meant and it is not what we mean. Just listen to what we say and have said in our confessions and don't imagine that we are saying what you want to believe we are saying. Anyone who has ever been a Calvinist, knows what we are saying. If they suggest that we believe God treats us as robots or puppets, they are lying.
It might be helpful if someone here from the synergists side of this debate would define for us what you mean by "free will." In response, I will be happy to define what I mean by "free will."
Jordan you said something to David to the effect of “I would have no problems with your version of calvinism…but it’s Calvin and pipers version of God authoring evil that’s the problem”. The thing is David’s “version of calvinism” isn’t even calvinism! That is why I do not despise David’s views, I despise calvinism, and David doesn’t even believe calvinism haha. At least regarding determinism. So far, I think I actually agree with everything David has said, and everything he has said (thus far only 50 minutes in) has basically aligned with everything a non Calvinist would say. He’s not saying anything whatsoever that is unique to calvinism. It sounds like he does not believe in determinism and acts and goes about his life as if everyone has free will, and like he said God allows evil (does not cause or determine evil) and yet is fully in control and can turn all the evil for good. That is a non Calvinist position.
I'm fairly certain he'd still disagree, there's just less raw meat to take umbrage at.
It's not that he's not a "Calvinist"...the problem is in your understanding of "determinism". There are many different types of determinism and a huge difference between the determinism of the biblical God and that of say for example Islam (which is another form of theistic determinism but impersonal and indifferent) and even other forms such as natural determinism or even other forms that exist in different types of gnosticism. Biblical theistic determinism basically says that God is in control or ordains ALL things that come to pass (through His decree of creation) including the creaturely free will and actions and choices of his creatures yet in such a way as God is NOT the author of sin. God USES evil in such a way to still bring about the GOOD that is decreed in His will for His purposes and glory. Foreknowledge is another example of determinism that is not often discussed or thought about. So unless someone is an open theist then they truly have the same problem as the "Calvinist " they just don't want to see that.
@@mikegreene9137 I could be spitballing here... but I think she knows that.
There is no mystery ..Paul's Gospel solves it! Look up mid acts dispensational stuff helped a lot of my concerns! You Tube channel ..Grace Ambassadors..totally solves all the conflicts!! So awesome to get out of philosophy and solve the problems of man with The Word! Calvinism makes the Jesus' death Burial and resurrection .. secondary. That's a sin..if not worse! Election is not about us today being saved! Jesus loves you..believe!
@@mikegreene9137can you explain how foreknowledge is another example of determinism? Can you define foreknowledge?
God being ‘Omniscient’ or ‘All Knowing’ logically entails the same results as Calvinism ( those results are ‘Determinism’ and ‘Predestination’ ).
Consider: -
1. God elected ‘exactly’ who would exist.
2. God knew who would be saved and who would not be saved before He elected ‘exactly’ who would exist.
3. God cannot be wrong.
4. If God knew that you would be saved, then you will be saved.
5. If God knew that you would not be saved, then you will not be saved.
There is no free will to do different-from or other-than what God knew you would do. Because God cannot be wrong, you ‘must do’ ‘exactly’ what He knew you would do. Thus, there is no free will. If anyone believes that God is ‘Omniscient’ or ‘All Knowing’ and they hate Calvinism, then they should hate their own non Calvinist position because as I wrote above….
God being ‘Omniscient’ or ‘All Knowing’ logically entails the same results as Calvinism ( those results are ‘Determinism’ and ‘Predestination’ ).
The Calvinist says "God knows how things are playing out".... NO. Consistency demands that God (as Dr. Piper says) is 'performing' how things are playing out because he is determining all things at all times. It' has all bee decreed in advance of Adam's creation... according to Calvinism. He's literally massaging his own doctrine as he goes to make it 'feel right' in the moment.
As I listened to this I always come to the same conclusion. Only a Calvinist can truly understand Calvinism. Even when shown clear statements of what Calvin said they will say you just don't understand. Or they will say well I am not John Piper and I don't believe that. It's so difficult to have a conversation with them. If Calvin said some are doomed from the womb, how is that a genuine choice for the person doomed?
How would you even know which Faith is given by God it's impossible. Someone says I have Faith in Jesus but is it given by God or is it given by themselves who would ever know.
19:40 Framing? what does Scripture say... still trying to fit Scripture into calvinism
In what way does God perfectly love one of his creatures - Satan, and those who are children of the Devil?
Under calvinism we all do not have the ability to choose, those passed over cannot choose salvation, and the elct cannot choose not to be saved.
What he is reading and saying is not calvinism as the mass majority including john calvin teached.
Babies are born doomed from the womb and cannot be saved, ither will be saved and cannot be lost.
Just as the sun hardens clay but softens wax so does the Spirit harden the hearts of the proud but softens the hearts of the humble(broken).
An honest true prayer from a calvinist is," please elect them Lord."
1:09:36 Yes - "election" IS God's plan - BUT, not "election to salvation" - but to service!
I think it is plain (to those with eyes to see) that the "first fruits" of Romans 11:16 are "the elect" - but "the lump" (or "batch") is inclusive of the "remainder" - and if the "elect" are made "holy" - the whole "lump" is ALSO made Holy! (Also note that Paul uses the Greek word for "lump" only twice in Romans - In Romans 9 for the lump out of which there are vessels of honor and vessels of common use are both made - And Romans 11 being the "lump" from which the elect "first fruits" are taken).
That parallels the fact that Paul affirms that those "broken off" (the NON-elect) can and WILL be "grated in again". Why? "Because God is ABLE"!
(I was a Calvinist pastor for 15+ years after attending Reformed Theological Seminary and attaining my M.Div. - I ain't no genius - but I do know whereof I speak 🤗)
Blessings!
wayne
Jordan, Can you tell me if you think the Psalmist was sinful when he wrote, "Do not I hate those who hate You, O God. I hate them with a perfect hatred?" Are you impugning God's character because He said to Israel, "You only have I known [loved] of all the families of the earth?"
No Provisionist I ever heard of says man is born neutral or that man can live in sinsless perfection! We believe in man's depravity after the fall, we just don't hold that total depravity means total moral inability as defined by Augustinian-Calvinists.
@ericedwards8902 So you believe every sinner without exception has a desire to be right with God in God's way? Since sinful, moral inability results from a sinful lack of desire to be put right with God in His way, it necessarily follows that if all without exception are able to believe as prescribed in the gospel, all must desire to be put right with God in His way. Is that what you truly believe?
@@TheBereanVoice did I say that? I believe I said that I don’t believe that total depravity is equivalent to total moral inability, because there is nothing in the Bible that supports it. So where in anything that I said are you deducting that I "believe that every sinner without exception has a desire to be right with God in God’s way?" If I didn't say it, don’t make out like that's anything that I said or believe; I said what I said and not a word more.
Perhaps you could share with me what you imagine so-called Total Depravity to mean. Since the inability of sinners to believe God results from their hostility toward Him and their lack of appetite for spiritual things, positing that all have the ability to believe would necessitate a belief that sinners in a state of nature are not hostile toward God and all have an appetite for spiritual things. Try inviting your pagan neighbors to attend a real church [one that hasn't been enginerred to pander to their self-centeredness and carnal nature] and see how much desire they have to spend an hour and a half worshipping God.
1hr:20min mark we are His enemies... because under calvinism He determined that we would be and could do no other.....
Romans 8:7 Because the mind of the flesh is an ENEMY against God: for does not subject itself to the law of God, neither indeed does it have the power to do so.
Romans 8:8 So then those in the flesh cannot please God.
All men are born determined into condemnation by the sin nature of the first birth. None excluded. All are born enemies of God.
I guess Gods grace in your life you consider it as unjust because He chose to determine you to salvation? Maybe you should reconsider.
@@aletheia8054 My point is not that we are enemies, but that under calvinism we are because God determined so before the foundation of the world..... Scripture doesn't support this idea
@@unitedstates3068 Forget Calvinism
and I don’t know who you’re talking about, “we”. The ones with the Inner man Christ are not enemies anymore.
@@aletheia8054 Yep- forget calvinism and all forms of reformed theology thinking...
Jordan, At about the one hour mark, you stated that your understanding of what Calvinists believe is that the light God has given is insufficient to enable the non-elect to believe. In reality, what we believe is that all the revelation God has given is incapable of enabling anyone [elect or non-elect] to believe.
The guest asked how do we wrap our heads around how much evil there is in the world? Not by accusing God of being in control (determining evil to happen), but that man's heart is infinitely evil and he has free will to work his evil deeds within the confines of the final consummation of mankind's existence that He is bringing about. There is a Judgment Day coming for us all, which proves man is responsible for his own deeds.
The only thing is: it's impossible for even Satan to be infinitely evil. All evil is finite, and most people aren't even 1/3 of the way to maximal depravity.
But more salient: if God decreed and brings about man's fall and all subsequent sin, by design, but indirectly by second order causes... the denial of God "determining" it doesn't add up, yet this seems to be his position.
Did God decree this or not? Does Dave claim the divine decree or not? Many calvinists point out that the decree itself is non causative, yes but that ignores the doctrine of providence by which he executes his decree... indirectly.
The issue of evil is hard because of Gods love and goodness. Your view does nothing to answer the problem. Why is God creating beings who will commit evil? Even harder is why is He not stopping evil at the moment it is happening.
There is only a couple options - He is in control or not.
If He is not capable of doing anything about it then that's is not the God of the Bible.
If He is capable to do something then Him not doing something to prevent it means that there is a reason for Him to let it continue.
I think the Calvinist is the only one actually making an attempt to explain its reason of existence.
If I can see evil happening then I know God can too.
Jordan, The following is a quote from the "The Eternal Predestination of God" by John Calvin. This is the work from which you supposedly took the quote from Calvin in which he denied that God OTIOSELY [the key word in the quote] permits all that occurs. [perhaps you should read Calvin's entire work and try to find that quote]. This is what Calvin wrote, "Although, therefore, I thus affirm that God did ordain the Fall of Adam, I so assert it as by no means to concede that God was therein properly and really the author of that Fall. That I may not, however, dwell extensively on this great point now, I will only express it as my view, belief and sentiment, that what Augustine so deeply teaches on this matter was fulfilled in God’s ordaining the Fall of Adam: “In a wonderful and unutterable way that was not done without the will of God (says he), which was even done contrary to His will; because it could not have been done at all, if His will had not permitted it to be done. And yet He did not permit it unwillingly, but willingly.” The great and grand principle, therefore, on which Augustine argues cannot be denied: “That both man and apostate angels, as far as they were themselves concerned, did that which God willed not, or which was contrary to His WILL; but that, as far as God’s overruling omnipotence is concerned, they could not, in any manner, have done it without His will.” To these sentiments of the holy man I subscribe with all my heart. I solemnly hold that man and apostate angels did, by their sin, that which was contrary to the will of God, to the end that God, by means of their evil will, might effect that which was according to His decreeing will."
This guy is a brother for sure but hes frustrating to listen to because he wants Calvinism without The Truth of itThis guy is a brother for sure but hes frustrating to listen to because he wants Calvinism without The Truth of it. We're John Piper believes in calvinism and the whole truth of it that's the difference.
A very important thing to remember, regardless of which side of the conversation you fall on, is that Calvinists and non- Calvinists have very different definitions of the word "Sovereignty."
To a Calvinist, "Sovereignty" or "God is in control" essentially means Theological Determinism. Essentially, in that view, God determines whatsoever comes to pass down to the minutae of detail. Sovereignty, to a Calvinist, means that there is nothing that is not, on every level, casually determined by God.
To a non-Calvinist Christian, "Sovereignty" and "God is in control" mean that God has the right and the authority to do as He wills, which may include to allow certain things that He did not directly or indirectly cause, or even to create beings with a limited capacity for autonomy without his determination. In this view, God does not need to compulsively ordain all things in order to be Sovereign.
Yes you are correct. I have had conversations and agreed on a topic and discussed God being sovereign but realized later we used different definitions and did not agree in the end.
Defining terms is very important.
I'd honestly take it one step further. We don't even have the same definition of the word "Gospel". Did God not choose to save whom he willed prior to the death or Christ? If He did, then what did the death of Christ accomplish? Aren't those led by the irresistible decision of God going to come to Him after the death of Christ just as they did before?
It seems clear to me that scripture teaches the Gospel (meaning The Good News) is available to all men and it is Satan himself who fights to hide that truth according to 2 Corinthians 4:3-4.
I hate to make such a strong claim but I truly believe calvinism expresses "an other gospel" warned about in Galatians 1:8
NO, we do not believe in causal determinism. That is one of Leighton Flowers' lies.
@@TheBereanVoice You just don't carry your posited ideology to its logical, unavoidable conclusion. And I have read much of Calvin's writings having been a calvinist my self for many years earlier in my life, and he CERTAINLY agreed with casual determinism. He repeats this multiple times both in regards to salvation and the existence of sin. Show me one quote from the writings of Calvin to the contrary.
@@folv6631 "Although, therefore, I thus affirm that God did ordain the Fall of Adam, I so assert it as by no means to concede that God was therein properly and really the author of that Fall. That I may not, however, dwell extensively on this great point now, I will only express it as my view, belief and sentiment, that what Augustine so deeply teaches on this matter was fulfilled in God’s ordaining the Fall of Adam: “In a wonderful and unutterable way that was not done without the will of God (says he), which was even done contrary to His will; because it could not have been done at all, if His will had not permitted it to be done. And yet He did not permit it unwillingly, but willingly.” The great and grand principle, therefore, on which Augustine argues cannot be denied: “That both man and apostate angels, as far as they were themselves concerned, did that which God willed not, or which was contrary to His WILL; but that, as far as God’s overruling omnipotence is concerned, they could not, in any manner, have done it without His will.” To these sentiments of the holy man I subscribe with all my heart. I solemnly hold that man and apostate angels did, by their sin, that which was contrary to the will of God, to the end that God, by of their evil will, might effect that which was according to His decreeing will." Calvin
If God caused all that occurs in His world, sin would not exist. If you had been a Calvinists as you claim, you would know that we do not believe that God is ever the proximate cause of sin. It would not exist had He not willed to permit it for a good purpose, but He does not cause it to occur. Our confessions of faith clearly state that.
Dave has come out in humility and probably saw some of the things where Jordan should have been pressed. Determinism (hard) is not how mainline Calvinists view theodicy. Jorden used words like “programmed” or “caused” or cited Calvin on God working in the hearts towards evil. All of which do in fact misrepresent Calvin. Since the words were never really properly defined, let me help.
Calvin used caused in the sense of God’s providential control whereby all things are brought to pass. Providentiality also includes God’s divine intercessions on our behalf. The question of equal ultimacy, which we know Calvin did not hold to since it was made heresy at the council of Orange, is not that God merely ordained all things, but that by an equal act (of the same nature and kind) he both worked faith in the elect as much as sin in the heart of man such as he would judge them for it. This Calvin does not say but elsewhere helps understand that God works only in the heart of towards himself. Read chapter 4 of the institutes and analogy of the good and bad rider.
Unless you see that we discussing two separate categories for God’s actions that scripture teaches us, then we’ll keep talking past each other. I doubt Dave would arrive here by the sound of it as he tended towards the mysterious far too quickly.
Jordan,
What you need to take into account is that even though God has flooded His sinful creation with revelation, sinners universally continue to suppress the truth in unrighteousness. Sinners universally hate the light and will not come to the light.
A god who commands men to repent and believe, but withholds repentance and faith from them, then condemns them to hell forever for their failure to repent and believe, is not recognizable to me as the God of the BIble.
That makes no sense of they are not elect for time past they have no chance of being saved.
No prayer or anything includung jesus can save them.
In other words his children either cannot be saved or automatically will be saved.
1:19:17 Jordon is quoting Jesus telling us in Matthew 5 "to love all your enemies." Sounds like maybe ones definition of what "love" is needs some intimate personal hermeneutical investigations. Why?
We heard all last month that "Love is Love." Remember? Is their definition of "love" the biblical definition of love?
If we're to love all our enemies, who is our greatest enemy? Is it not Satan? Are we to love Satan?
You see there's questions here that ONLY YOU, through prayer and asking the Lord to show you His Truth, that YOU need to know the answer to. Agreed?
Psalm 97:10
Ye that love the Lord, hate evil: he preserveth the souls of his saints; he delivereth them out of the hand of the wicked.
Psalm 139:21
Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?
David just sounds like a non Calvinist yet somehow calls himself Calvinist 🤷🏼♀️🤷🏼♀️🤷🏼♀️ “God _allows_ evil…. Not every single action is determined by God, men have choices…God _knows_ all things and _knows_ who will be saved”
David this isn’t calvinism! Lol and the things that ARE unique to calvinism you’re repulsed by and have a distaste for!
Agree. Sounds like a one point Calvinist -- the U only.
There are a lot of soft calvinism who hide in the rhetorical pockets created by some specific teachers who emphasize very narrow language.
This fits how he uses allow and control. He straight up says he's essentially agreeing with Piper but disagrees with how he's saying it. He only SOUNDS agreeable because he resists restatements of his very rhetorically narrow set of words.
God did everything in the beginning even that Christ would be manifest.
"Thats the biggest thing i hear from you and others... *its not fair* "
Jordan: 🙂(😐)
Ive never heard Jordan say "its not fair", as an actual complaint/argument against calvinism.
You re right . I was likely just trying to paraphrase an objection but it did not come out right. This was made @ 2 months ago and I had forgotten alot of what we talked about so I also heard what I said and thought some things were not said very well. Hopefully better next time.🤔
@@davevandervelde4799 it's rare that my estimation of someone consistently goes up after interacting with them repeatedly over difficult subjects.
👍
God bless.
@@ravissary79 These aren't difficult subjects. 😊
Thanks You too
@@davevandervelde4799 socially difficult... at least that might explain the insane vitriol that's common to this topic.
It is time for your public apology.
I have a really good bible mentor who is Calvinist can I invite him for an interview!
Beware people who hear clear statements that are problematic and saying, "I think what he meant was..." If that's how you treat clear statements that is probably how you read the Bible.
Calvinism is MAN centred
M Manichaeism
A Augustinianism
N gNosticism
Self Determinist are man centered.
M- Mans
A- Autonomously
N- Needing nothing
Jordan, I have great resect for you and your ability to have this conversation. You have been given a 'gift' which many, especially me, have not received. We are all 'tools' in God's toolbox and not all designed for the same job. We yield ourselves to the job for which he has equipped us. I admire you.
the person on the right wishes to try to bring into the debate.. some evil thinks that have happened in the world.. then ask the person on the right.. "so would sat God allows this evil to happen"? or something to that affect... so what are our choices?
a).. to believe God is unaware of what goes on in His creation?.. such as "Adam where art thou?."..?... or "Cain where is they brother?".. these are legitimate questions .. right?.. cuz God is Not omniscient?..
b).... God enjoys having these cruelties take place because our God is a Sadist and loves to see His creation suffer
c) there is NO GOD
d)...God has a purpose for every evil He allows in this world including the torture or death of any innocents. .AND this purpose is ONLY known to Him...
e)... God has NO control over what He creates...
take your pick..... You must believe in one of those options
I choose option d....
1:012:45.... This nice man has become convinced he's a Calvinist... but he's obviously not. He is simply confused. Nowhere in Calvinism is man afforded the ability to 'choose' to accept the Gospel. The non-elect is unable and God withholds the ability by his unchangeable decree.
R. C. Sproul reluctantly affirmed in the Calvinist view Salvation is akin to 'spiritual rape' in the sense that the unregenerate literally has 'no choice' in the matter. He wrote:
"I personally do not like the term “rape” for the Reformed position concerning regeneration (i.e being born again) prior to belief. Yet with that said, I think I understand why non-Reformed folk invoke the term, for despite protestations, when one breaks down Reformed soteriology, one is left with the fact that regeneration occurs against the will of the unregenerate sinner-the sinner has NO CHOICE in the matter; as such, there is some truth to the claim that it is “a forced love”." Of course... 'forced love' is not love according to 1Cor.13, which literally defines true love.... which is not only the nature of God, but it is 'what' God is... the personification of "Love".
NOOOOO! Even as a believer you are not going to be perfect or complete as your Father is perfect. That will only become are reality when we are with the glorified saints in heaven.
40min Great Quote by JC but JC also teaches you can't stretch out that hand (Total Inability). THAT IS THE POINT OF CONTENSION..... a broken clock is right twice a day.... JonnyMac has some great sermons (the ones not including Calvinism, cessationism, Eileen Gray. ...)
Yup exactly. Total Depravity teaches man will not/cannot stretch a hand to God
Even John Calvin isn't a consistent Calvinist lol😂
I wonder when the apology for misusing a quote from Calvin that was taken from a treatise that Jordan has obviously never read is going to come. Both I and another viewer have posted lengthy quotes from Calvin that showed that he did not believe what was alledged. Jordan clearly stated that he would apologize if someone could show him that he had used the quote out of context. We are waiting.
Additionally, I have asked Jordan to read an article that was posted with approval at "Desiring God" that shows that Piper was not saying that God has causally determined the molestation of a child or that He has meticulously caused sinners to sin by putting sinful desires in their hearts. The determination/free will debate is a philosophical one and not a theological one. I hope Jordan will soon read that article and ask forgiveness for misrepresenting Piper as well.
Jordan,
You seem to assume that responsibility carries with it ability. I can demonstrate from many passages of Scripture that such an assumption is erroneous. For example, do all have the responsibility to be subject to God's law? Absolutely!!! Yet, Paul wrote concerning those who are in the flesh and mind the things of the flesh that they are hostile toward God and are not subject to God's law, and indeed CANNOT be. Additionally, Matt. 5 specifies the manner in which God loves His entire creation, i.e., benevolently and beneficiently. Calvinists do not deny that God loves all in those ways. We, following the manner in which God loves, are to love our enemies by acting benevolently and beneficiently toward them. Though that is our duty, there is nothing in the text that suggests that we are able to do that completely as God does it completely.
21:40 Interesting.... 🤔 His response is 'sorrow"?? When he sees God's will being accomplished and manifested in the earth, demonstrating God's meticulous 'control', which caused the brutal death of women and children at the hands of a mentally unstable person (also a condition caused by God's decree), ... and he finds this comforting?? He cannot blame evil on Satan because Calvinism denies it. So, how can he actually claim evil exists, other than to say it is God who performs evil.
But, If he actually believes an evil event is the will of God manifest in the earth.. why is there no rejoicing??
The cognitive dissonance necessary to embrace Calvinism is mind-numbing.
The classical theist view of God and time has so completely infiltrated the mind of Calvinists they can't imagine any other God.
Oh, Plato, you cheeky little philosophizer
Just a few minutes in and he already disagrees with two Calvinists. Not a knock on him, but it demonstrates the absurdity of “you don’t understand Calvinism”
At 1:23:30 David brings up that without total depravity is it possible that one could live a perfect sinless life?
I DO NOT think the sin nature = total depravity. I think Calvinists tend to use these terms interchangeably. I do believe we are all born with a sin nature (our nature is to sin and we all have a bent towards sin) we all fall short of the glory of God. In big ways and in small ways, in our actions and our motives, and what we choose to think on, dwell on and ruminate on all no matter what falls short of the glory of God (quick distinction: I do not believe that the temptation we experience is sin. Only if we act on it or dwell on it is it sin).
Because I believe in the sin nature, I definitely believe left to ourselves no one would ever choose God and be saved. But the good news is, no one is or has been left to themself. God has reached out to every person giving them the grace to believe. Gods hand is reached out to everyone and if we grab it we can do all things. But we must grab it and that is a decision we will have to make. God has not made that decision for us before the foundation of the world. To the contrary, God made the decision before the foundation of the world to send His Son for all people desiring for all people to be saved.
If you have an evil thought is it a sin if you don't act on it?
So God's grace is available to all we just have to cooperate with it?
@@heavenbound7-7-7-7 I think if a evil thought comes into your mind and you reject it (didn’t ruminate or act) I do not think you sinned. Satan tempted Jesus, yet Jesus never sinned.
@@heavenbound7-7-7-7 yep Jesus died for all and God is giving His grace to all, but you must accept :)
@@Loves2HugItOut If you reject every evil thought can you become sinless?
the person debating PRO Calvinism... does Not know their bible very well... if they did one point they would make is Not to say..."I DON'T THINK HE (GOD) IS THE AUTHOR OF SIN...
perhaps referring to God as the author of sin is a CRUDE way of stating it... but part of the foundational belief in Calvinism as stated before this is that God is totally Sovereign over all of His creation..
I do not want to burst this guy's bubble but look at this ,.. Proverbs 16:4
The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
God has created evil...or the wicked.. WHY?... for the day of evil.... when is that?... when this evil suits God's purpose... such as...
the betrayal of Judas
the denial of Peter
the hardness of the pharaoh's heart
You name it.. .. so in a sense...God IS the "author ".. of sin... but I am ok with that because He is God... He can do as He pleases... and I will be happy in it...
"let Thy will be done ,,..LORD.. Not mine..."...
even Jesus prayed THAT prayer...
Much love to the brother for stating his views honestly and rejecting the first four points of calvinism and stating everyone can choose christ and then become elect.
1 point calvinism.
He is seemingly trying to have his cake and eat it to.
Totally not calvinism at all by traditional standard.
He has no total inability no unconditional election no limited atonement no irresitable grace.
And we have free will to choose.
Its good to see different forms of calvinism.
You know what a really bad combination is? A Calvinist who does believe he has done something that God therefore showed him favor and that he is actually chosen for a reason. My friend , there is a deep ditch on either side of this road called Grace.
I believe that my condition as a slave to my sin and the nature of my flesh in this world prevents me from having a relationship with God ( as Adam did before the fall) God intervened to release me from that bondage and even though I am still physically in the flesh I am filled with the Spirit.
God, in His great mercy, did that apart from anything in me .
I deserved the death Jesus suffered for me.
I also believe that Jesus taught that not all men will go to be with Him in heaven. Therefore the atonement is limited. I believe it is limited since not all men will be released from their bondage of sin and a sin nature.
I also know when my heart was changed, I did love and want to follow Christ. I find Him very irresistible. I have tried and tried with people I know and they do not find Him irresistible. They all say they like him.
And I had the real and genuine ability to walk away from the faith by my choice. God had the ability and the autonomous right to exercise His choice and change my heart.
I thank Him everyday.
So I think I do believe all this things. It just hard to accurately explain that in a casual conversation. I definitely could have done much better.
@@davevandervelde4799why are arguing with God oh man, he set up his system of grace through faith not of ourselves so no man can boast, and you are arguing against God's system, basically saying he made a mistake, he should do it like gnosticism c and Calvinist by taking away and ability to have faith in God choose good or evil and having God predetermined salvation and damnation unchangeable for everyone ahead of time, while steal pretending everyone can believe ad no way of f knowing who's elect or not as many fall away from the faith even in calvinism.
God says of you truly believe, you are saved, if you do not believe you are not save, that's eternal security not mysterious doomed fro the Calvinist womb for destruction or born again before you believe which would make being prechosen not Jesus the reason for salvation.
So you are.
wrong God told him to believe drew him with the holy spirit word of God gave him the ability to have faith or reject faith and him and said believe in me for salvation and life, reject me for damnation and death.
God set up that man's responsibility to believe for salvation John 3 16.
That faith does not save God saves those that do what he asks them to do and gives them the ability to do and God gets all the glory as the faith does not save one bit.
God saves
@jasonr9678 context is everything my friend and you failed, you are reading manmade doctrine into the text and assuming things not true.
More study listen to other non Calvinist viewpoints in those passages and your eyes will be open
Many similar arguments were made with Jacob I love esau I hate meaning for service as a nation to bring forth Christ like hate your mother and brother etc meaning do not choose them over Christ.
Hardening pharaoh .
Who's heart was already in rebellion.
And remember God is restraining all mankind from being as evil as we could some say would be.
So in the last days as he releases his restraining power on evil that could very well be the delusion being sent not God doing it but allowing his restraint to be released same with Job and allowing the devil to work within limits by releasing his restraints in the devil.
Context is jetmy.
seems David Vandervel doesn't know he's not a calvinist, he just thinks he does because it sounds more like "sound doctrine" but he has to sweet talk or talk like an armnian to explain calvinisnm :S
Not to be mean or anything, but where did you get this guy? He is the LEAST Calvinist “Calvinist” I’ve ever heard ( he is like a -2 points Calvinist)
My question to David (or any other Calvinist):
If I happened to be praying for someone who is not of the elect (whom I do not know and will never know whether they are or not until the resurrection), is there any chance of God answering that prayer by giving faith to that nonelect person anyway?
This is a very good question and worded very well. It will get to the main objection that is were most people stumble over this.
I will not answer by skirting around it. The direct answer is no. But not for why you may think. I am not a theologian and I will stand corrected if need be.
God is not changing His mind because of our prayer. Our prayer is a sign of faith and trust. Any prayer that we ask to be answered, like for healing from illness , can be answered as we request. However, you are asking the omnipotent and infinite God of the universe about something that He already knows the answer.
Your prayer does not change Gods mind per se , the prayer is part of His knowledge regarding the future that he already knows will come to pass. Our view and perspective of the prayer is when answered the way we asked, is that God answered positively. Gods view is that you were faithful and glorified Him through the faith you showed by that prayer.
As a Calvinist I would say it was a means ( my faithfulness in prayer) to the ends (Gods eternal knowledge and decree.)
What we can't know is what would the outcome have been if we had not prayed. Because that is not what action we took.
Saying some one is elect or not is not in view for us when we pray. But what a wonderful thing it will be to meet someone we prayed for when we get to heaven.
And God will get all the Glory.
@@davevandervelde4799
I appreciate your honest answer:
“I will not answer by skirting around it. The direct answer is no.”
Like you, I too have kids (now adults) who do not express allegiance to Christ. So, I understand what carrying around that weight feels like. I also used to be a Calvinist, so I understand why you answered the way that you did. I would have answered the same way back then. However, I want to share with you why I no longer hold to Calvinism.
My brother, who passed away recently at the age of 50, had been institutionalized since he was 6 months old. A complication occurred while my mother was giving birth to him, leaving him in a vegetative state, attached to a feeding tube for the rest of his life. He was not supposed to live beyond a year. My mother is not a believer, and my brother’s life I believe had an impact on my mother’s thoughts about God. However, she did tell me several years before his passing that when my brother finally dies (if we out live him), even though she did not agree with by beliefs, that she only wanted me to speak at his funeral. This was a mayor reason why I had to seriously think about how to justify to my family, who are mostly unbelievers (especially in light of my brother’s life), why God is so wonderful and loving, and to also offer them some sort of hope with regards to my brother's ultimate fate after death. This would not be a room full of theologians, kicking around ideas about what they thought the Bible said. No, this would be a room full of really sad and confused loved ones who had been devastated by 5 decades of pain and horror, wondering about why my brother ever even lived in the first place, nor less what his fate now was after death. This started my journey to possibly find some answers to try to be ready if that day should ever come.
So, what did this all have to do with Calvinism?
You mentioned something about prayer that I as a Calvinist also used to agree with:
“God is not changing His mind because of our prayer. Our prayer is a sign of faith and trust.
Any prayer that we ask to be answered, like for healing from illness, can be answered as we request. However, you are asking the omnipotent and infinite God of the universe about something that He already knows the answer.
Your prayer does not change Gods mind per se, the prayer is part of His knowledge regarding the future that he already knows will come to pass.”
One thing is for certain, my family of unbelievers would also certainly agree with part of this statement. Whatever prayers they might have expressed during my brother’s 50 years were never answered, because the God that they might have at times even acknowledge to exist (as they learned)… does not change. Whether it be for my brother’s recovery, or even for my mother’s desire for him to just die and be free from such an existence, God just kept on trucking along, leaving my brother in his condition. The weird thing is, early in my walk with Christ, I had even believed that I could just drive up to where my brother was institutionalized, pray over him and just walk out with him healed. I even tried. It didn’t work (much to my embarrassment in sight of an orderly who happened to be there when I attempted). That day spoke to the notion (in my mind at the time anyway) that God doesn’t change. Did I demonstrate “a sign of faith and trust,” as you mentioned? Sure, but it didn’t change God.
But, now it was about twenty years later and I was now faced with the potential reality of one day standing in front of my family, assigned with the task of explaining what the purpose of my brother’s existence might have been, and what his fate in death might be.
What my Calvinism taught me was that my brother’s ultimate fate was hell. Not just while he was alive, but also in his death. Why? Because a loving God decreed it in eternity past. A loving God decided before the foundation of the world that my brother would not only spend 50 years in a vegetative state on a feeding tube, but that my brother would then be tortured in hell forever for the guilt that he had incurred from Adam; and… God doesn’t change.
I was now at a crossroads. Do I just bite the bullet and plan on just being absolutely honest with my family (if that day ever should come) in order to demonstrate that “sign of faith and trust,” as you also mentioned? Or, should I maybe just skirt around it by defaulting to “mystery” regarding a loving God, and that we should all trust that my brother is exactly where a loving God would have him, giving them all the impression that my brother was not really experiencing hell?
Neither.
Instead, I decided to really look into what the Bible says, and not view it through the lense of Calvinism.
Sorry for being so long, but I think it’s important. In a nut shell, this is what I learned when I just looked at the text:
The Bible says that it is appointed for man to die once, and then the judgement. (Hebrews 9:27) So, my brother would not be immune to a judgement of his sin. Fine. But, it also says says that sin is knowing the right thing to do, yet failing to do it. (James 4:17) I was not convinced that my brother had any idea of what the right thing to do in any situation even was, so he never actually committed any sin. The Bible also says this in Revelation 20:12-13 - “I also saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life, and the dead were judged according to their works by what was written in the books. Then the sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead; all were judged according to their works.” Again, my brother had no works, so that solves that.
As for Adam’s sin possibly condemning my brother? The Bible says that the person who sins is the one who will die. A son won’t suffer punishment for the father’s iniquity, and a father won’t suffer punishment for the son’s iniquity. The righteousness of the righteous person will be on him, and the wickedness of the wicked person will be on him. (Ezekiel 18:20) Also, when I dove deeper into Romans 5:12, I found out that it can be rendered as:
“…just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, in this way death spread to all men, as a result all sinned.”
Meaning, Adam’s sin exiled humanity from having access to the tree of life, therefore as I mentioned earlier from Hebrews 9:27, “it is appointed for man to die once, and then the judgement.” In other words, Adam didn’t pass on guilt (as many Calvinists claim that Romans 5:12 indicates), but that it only says that mortality is what Adam passed on us all as a result of his sin. Even Thomas Schreiner, a Calvinist scholar also agrees with this rendering:
Thomas Schreiner, sbts-wordpress-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/equip/uploads/2014/05/SBJT-V15-N1_Schreiner.pdf (page 3 {80}) - I actually think the words translated “because” are incorrect here. I think a better translation is “as a result.”
If all of these things (and others) that I had been seeing in the Bible were correct, it meant that for whatever reason that God had my brother live the life that he lived, my brother’s fate after death was not hell. It also meant that I had to now leave those Calvinistic glasses off when reading the Bible. It also meant that I could give my family some peace of mind that my brother was not only not suffering after death, but that he never would. Shedding my Calvinism also would allow me to tell my unbelieving family that a loving God not only loves my brother, but that He also loves them. That He loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16) As a Calvinist, I could not with any sincerity say to my family that God loves them or my brother. In Calvinism, God only decided to love some in eternity past.
When my brother died, my mother decided to have a priest handle his funeral. She just wanted it all to be over quickly. My journey out of Calvinism, by looking into what the Bible actually describes, was not in vein however. I have gotten opportunities to share these Biblical insights with my mom. Her heart is softer now to talking about these things, and even though she doesn’t acknowledge Christ at the moment, she does now acknowledge God’s existence (which she never did before). My mother is also at peace regarding my brother’s ultimate fate and she no longer exhibits a hatred of God (to my knowledge anyway), as she had my whole life.
My prayer is that my family, especially two of my kids, will continue to be given opportunities to hear about Jesus. They certainly have heard about Him already from me, my wife, and their older brother, and that will continue as long as God allows. Hopefully, others might come along as well, if God so decides. The choice is theirs when they hear.
This was my journey out of Calvinism. Again, sorry it was so long.
@@theidolbabblerthedailydose33 Although I think the raw, direct study into scripture and tackling the words/issues associated with Calvinism head on is the way to go (for example the word predestined is used 6 times in the Bible and not once does it relate to the act of salvation/born-again). I found these studies to be the most critical in my departure from calvinistic thought.
But interestingly enough, to double down on your testimony, I had a similar experience in a different way. I could not reconcile that neither myself nor any other calvinist was actually living their lives as if we believed what we taught was true. We witnessed to the lost as if it were possible for them to be saved, even though we believed the vast majority of humanity is not chosen unto salvation. We would have been more honest to go around saying that 90% of them (and that is being generous) are doomed, but hey if you can hear the gospel you're one of the lucky few who won the coin toss. Never was it presented that way and certainly was not how I was presented with the Gospel when I became saved. That was the first hypocrisy. The second was the thought that we grieve over death, cringe at evil acts, and overall refuse to acknowledge the Glory of God in evil if we truly believe it to be his handiwork. Why would I grieve a divorce of a loved one if it was the will of God? Why did I feel sorrow when my twin daughters passed away if these deaths were for the magnificent glory of the Creator? My mind was never aligned with the actual conclusive thought that Calvinism SHOULD lead to. Ultimately that if God revels in death and sin, that we should be excited whenever we see these things take place. For who are we to judge God choosing to abuse a young boy through his Uncle? What a question to unpack. Ultimately this led me to the conclusion through scriptural backing that God grieved with me at the divorce of my family member. The death of my daughters. And absolutely despises the abuse of young children. Clearly God demonstrates these emotions in scripture. But how, if they are all to His glory? Why do we not praise Satan for arrogantly confronting God as he was preordained to do if we believe it is so? Clearly this mode of thinking is flawed. And even if we pretend to be convinced by the doctrines surrounding it, we don't ever live as if it's true. There is an extreme cognitive dissonance that has to be observed and concluded.
Ultimately, this led me to study the words in question (foreknowledge, predestined, elected, etc.) and not once do they ever refer to the then-and-there reborn salvation of new believer. I honestly don't know how I was convinced it was ever so. Simply reading my Bible was enough to convince me of the alternative.
I am going to erase my comment since I dont want it out there. I appreciate your input, and I am very aware of the issues you raised, as is my pastors and the pastor teaching the course.
I said I was angry and full of self pity. That was really to show the stark difference between then and now.
These issues are a very long time ago and I have lived a very good life with my wife and kids for 33 years.
I cant explain here and your input is noted, and I thank you for that.
@@davevandervelde597 Understood, I'll remove mine as well as far as that topic is concerned.
Calvinism/Lordship Salvation causes doubt of my salvation and the goodness of God
21:38 refer to story of Job.... Satan is the one desiring evil, God is the one who puts boundaries on that Evil. JonnyMac says God wills evil to exist... what? ... Scripture Chapter&verse?
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
@@aletheia8054 if you think "and create evil" is Determinism.. ie God saying He is responsible for human evil/wickedness such as murder, rape, the holocausts etc then please reread the context... as a better understanding of the word is calamity/ disaster. This is supported throughout Scripture and is a form of warning/judgement... as opposed to countless verses like Micah 2:1
@@unitedstates3068 Yeah, create evil is determine. When God created the heavens and the Earth he determined it. Same with evil.
Has nothing to do with Calvin. Forget Calvin.
It’s like you’re living in stupidville
@@aletheia8054 but this video was a discussion with a calvinist??? I'm happy to hear you agree to forget Calvin... maybe forget the teachings he introduced into the church too ... 1 John 4:1
@@unitedstates3068 I’m not a Calvinist. You don’t have to be a Calvinist to see that God said he creates evil.
You just need to be able to read .
1:06:11 So sad and confused about his lost children and God's eternal decree for their soul. He has 'hope'... really? He prays for that God will 'do something'... but what?... Will God change his unchangeable decree because of a father's prayer? That is categorically impossible. He follows this up that the cannot come to faith unless God has already decreed it... yet he prays that it will happen🤔🤔 Calvinism does not allow that man has the 'ability' to humble himself.
What he just said is not calvinism at all sorry.
Agreed
look up elect for salvation it's not there! Israel are "mine elect"
Faith is not the gift salvation is the gift to the believer right?
1:42:00 ... According to Calvinism, can anyone 'live' a faithful life if God has not decreed that they will, and if he has can they refuse? And if he has not is it even possible? The answer to both is, "no". One can do nothing other than what God has already decreed for them... the same is true for those who eventually abandon the faith. "Apostasy", however you define it, is only by God's eternal decree... and, for a Calvinist, it could happen at any moment.🙄
I would love to hear a biblical discussion instead of a philosophical debate, what I hear from most Calvinist philosophical perspective is to claim: Yes God cause people to sin, and at the same time God is not the cause of sin, nobody knows how, but that’s the way it is. Not a single verse says that God causes people to sin anywhere in the Bible, this teaching is a philosophical conclusion coming from a theological system, not a biblical teaching in my opinion.
How about the entire plan clearly recorded in the old testament with explicit details regarding Jesus, his life and death with prophesy of the details. God has used men to bring about His plan and they acted as free agents in doing exactly according to their will . To save you and me.
God can not make 1 promise if He is not the one ordaining what will come to pass.
@@davevandervelde4799 yes God did tell us in the Bible his redemption plan, but to say that the only way God knows about anything is by determining it is not biblical, knowledge does not necessitates causation, God tells us in scripture what he determined, but he also says clearly that he does not determines everything, specially sin: And they built the high places of Baal, which are in The Valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. Jeremías 32:35 , how can God determine something that he does not command? Scripture negates what calvinism affirms.
@@Redimido42 If God must rely on libertarian free will of his created beings to fulfill his preordained plan then He is no longer God. God is the only being in existence that is autonomous. We live and have our being in Him.
The passage you quoted is clearly showing men acting out their free choices. Every action that comes to pass is one that God decrees. If He did not then He is "learning what man does and the Bible teaches that He is omnipotent and omniscient.
Therefore nothing can happen apart from his authority.
I am sorry but His creation is not able to do anything without His say so.
This may or may not help.
You decide to get in your car and drive to the store for milk. Your choice.
You can not decide to arrive at the store. That is not your choice. Millions of factors are at play just for you to do that. Even down to the density of the air in your tires which is not in your control. I could list a 1000 different possibilities that you must say God is ultimately in complete control of that and will determine if you get your milk.
Including when you get to the store and they are sold out!!!
Listen you can argue this untill the end of your life which God could decide that in the next 30 seconds your heart beat will no longer occur. You have 5 more heart beats. Is God observing that ? Or is He acting in that ?
@@davevandervelde4799 If God says: which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin. So: 1.- he did not commanded them 2.- Did not came into the mind of God 3.- God did not cause Juda to sin. Well I believe God: your argument pretty much is: God determines, all otherwise he is not God. There’s a difference between determining and permitting, if God says he does not cause sin, and the calvinist teachers say he does, at this point their argument is against scripture/ God, I believe scripture. What you basically do is argue against scripture.
@@Redimido42 You should go and listen to the quote I read from the Belgic Confession. It says exactly what you say. God is not the author of evil. It agrees with you as do I. I never said God causes sin, the exact opposite.
Crude analogy, but most mob bosses don't commit murders, they order and approve them. However, legally they are culpable not just for conspiracy but murder. Same with God ordaining sin. If you set it up and order it, you're guilty.
Romans 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
@@aletheia8054 respectfully, is that actually the best "answer" you have to my comment? Is that like Calvinist boilerplate whenever you get challenged on this issue? But let me assure you that I am not answering back to God, unless you consider your particular theology to be the words of God. In other words, I am not answering back to God, I am answering back to Calvinism. And I don't think there's any prohibition on that.
So, is the Most High guilty of murdering Christ, seeing He decreed every detail of it before creation itself?
@@ericedwards8902 what better answer than from the Bible
@@ManassehJones Lol yeah he’s got God “culpable” and “guilty” for the greatest murder ever committed
God “ordered the hit” on Jesus. 🤣🤣🤣
Freewill = ignorance
People believe that Calvinists, [including Piper] think that God causes the wicked desires and actions of sinners because chalatans like Leighton Flowers have blantantly lied to thousands.
People believe that Calvinists like Piper think God causes all wicked desires and actions because that is what they explicitly teach. If you do not think Piper and Desiring God ministries teach this then I'd recommend listening/reading more from them.
@@GreatLightStudios I would suggest that you go to Desiring God and read the article that is posted there that explicitly denies the idea that God causes all wicked desires and actions. Your error is that you imagine that decreeing all that will occur is the same as causing all desires and actions. Read the quote from Calvin that I posted here which directly contradicts the quote that supposedly was taken from Calvin's "The Eternal Predestination of God." You might wish to direct me to the location of the supposed quote in that treatise.
@@GreatLightStudios You need to learn that Leighton Flowers and his ilk are prodigious liars.
@@GreatLightStudios When do you plan to apologize for misrepresenting Calvin's view relative to permission? I have posted a quotation from Calvin in which he addressed the issue on which you misrepresented him. The quotation was actually taken from Calvin's treatise on the eternal predestination of God that you claimed contained the quotation you cited. You first need to ask forgiveness for cutting and pasting a quotation that cannot be found in that treatise. You then need to ask forgiveness for wrongly attributing a view to Calvin that he clearly did not believe.
This conversation was necessary. I’m a Calvinist and I am grateful to see you have people who are Calvinist come on your podcast and discuss doctrine with you.
I wish I was a little clearer but hopefully some of peoples misconceptions are at least something to think about more. I know I have needed to study the non Calvinist side and know I believe what I believe not because of what someone just told me.
@@davevandervelde4799Thank you coming on to discuss Doctrines of Grace and your kind conversation with Jordan. Non Calvinist see that when God calls us to love our enemies, that Jesus is saying He loves His enemies.
I have never heard a Provisionist say that we won’t sin anymore. I have seen many times Calvinists accuse provisionists as thinking they believe they don’t sin anymore because they save themselves.
Also, you asked if Justice was loving in the case of a kidnapper and murderer getting a guilty verdict. We see that the Calvinist view of Justice is that The Judge, God hires the child kidnapper so that he, The Judge can give the guilty party justice and a prison sentence.
@@theresaread72 I wanted to see dialogue that people could see the differences and better know why they believe what they believe.
Loving our enemies is the same for us.
Calvinist don't think that a provisionist wont sin. It was a theological point made to show how a sinner who inherits Adams sin nature is a sinning by default because of the Federal Headship of Adam. When we are "In Christ" we are then under the Federal Headship of Christ. In other words "He is our King"
This is a point I would like further discussion on because now that I have heard the video myself I think Jordan says something that I need clarification on. Namely that because we are in Christ now we can be perfect and" love our enemies perfectly" I will need to talk to him about that. Maybe the next video. I believe, the entire reason we are commanded to like in obedience and "be perfect" lets say, is to drive us to fix our eyes on the cross since it is only 'in Him" we will ever find that to be true. We cant do it, until we are glorified and in His presence. That is why Paul I know what I should do but I don't do it in the flesh.
Making these analogies really does not get to the real biblical model for what is going on. God is not just the Judge but the Prosecutor, the Jury , the arresting officer and He has placed His son on the stand to be the one charged with and then found guilty with our crimes. But God is never guily of anything. It is impossible even when in the Bible He shows us that He is acting against men to punish them by killing them.
The question you just cannot answer is " why them and not me" because I am guilty too. That is called Grace and we do not have an answer to that question. I believe the provisionist thinks they have the answer to that question. Because they "humbled themselves" but I would actually say that you didn't. God humbled you.
Anyhow it is part of the reason to talk more. Keep studying and God bless.
@@davevandervelde4799 Conversations like these are difficult and I honor you for discussing doctrines of grace with Jordan. It takes me at least twice, watching conversations like these to understand what is being said. In my 5 years of studying doctrines of grace, one thing that you mention and I try to emphasize is the term The Apostle Paul uses in much of his letters “In Him, In Christ, or in the Beloved”. We see in scriptures that after you put your faith in Jesus Christ you are placed in Him. We have Christ’s righteousness as you agreed with, however we need to renew our mind with the Word of God, obey Jesus teaching, pray etc. I may be wrong and will be watching your discussion again but I did not hear Jordan state that we are sinless after we get saved. Jordan was saying that we do sin. Thanks for listening, and may God richly bless you!
@@theresaread72 Thanks for the kind words. I dont think I said he thought we could be sinless but that is something I would ask him some questions about. It seems that he said when we are in Christ we are given the ability to obey perfectly. He read Matthew 5 to show that. I was trying to make the point that there are many commands in the Bible that we are told , that is impossible for us. The purpose for that is to turn us to Christ . Like the law acting as a mirror to show us what we can not do and need Him.
God bless you . thanks
For a guy that claims to be a Calvinist, he’s quite ignorant what Calvinism actually teaches.
My goal was not to debate point for point with Jordan. He did raise some of the questions I realized after watching that I should have handled better. Much better. If or when a 2nd video comes out I will try to be prepared to do that clearly. I thought by reading quotes that real theologians have written over the centuries that I would convey an idea that maybe there is more there that people dont realize.
I absolutely agree with C.S. Lewis on this topic. In order for true love to happen God must allow free will. BUT because of the atonement of Christ for the sin of the world He wants that murder to repent and trust in Christ. The cross allows sinners like me (before Christ) to even live and breath. The cross gave the world justification of life or else God would be zapping people off the face of the earth. God is with us in very hard times,He will never leve us nor forsake us. If God is the author of all evil what is the point of satan? It would be much much harder to believe that God causes all evil. All things WORK together for good . There is a working (His Sovereignty) together that only He can do.
C.S. Lewis is amazing but wrong on this point.
Will love exist in heaven? Yes of coarse. Will you have the ability to sin or will evil exist? no.
Therefore love can exist without free will.
Free will has never and will never explain the existence of evil. If it did then by definition it would be able to overcome God. God allows it. The only biblical explanation is in the calvinist interpretation of scripture.
@@davevandervelde4799 Well Im glad you think C.S. Lewis is amazing so do I!! But I can't believe you are comparing earth(where sin originated) and heaven where sin doesn't exist. Sorry but bad example.
Perfect example. God created both places. On earth, God determined that evil exist for a purpose and in heaven, God determined to not allow evil to exist.
He has a purpose in both decisions.
@@davevandervelde597 If I'm understanding you correctly your say because God determined for evil (sin) to exist on earth He can't allow free will?
We are created in His image as volitional beings. The ability to choose good or evil. It is only when we define free will as autonomous ( self law) that we have a problem.
God created evil to be a choice for us. Free will did not create evil.
God, who knows the future perfectly and it will be as He sees it, and He is not bound by time, has therefore determined the outcome of everything.
Vandervelde says: "...how we need to put our trust and our faith in Him..." Oops. If you're CHOSEN whey do you have to put your trust and faith in Jesus? He has already chosen you so you're wasting your time. SMH
You seem to be a nice guy but you also seem very confused. Cerca 1:37, you stated that, according to Calvinism, they refused to love the truth BECAUSE God refused to grant them the ability to love the truth. That is not what Calvinists believe at all. God's decision to pass over certain sinners and leave them to their own just destruction does nothing to cause their rebellion. If God had chosen to do nothing for anyone, these same rebels would still be rebels. His decision to save a people chosen for Himself has no effect at all on those He has determined to leave in their rebellion.
Bad news Gospel of Calvinism. God arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death and are to glorify him by their destruction.( John Calvin Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
or
“…salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5)
Bad news Gospel of Islam. Allah knows everything, determines everything, decrees everything, and orders everything. Allah is even the cause of evil (Unveiling Islam, p. 109).
Allah predestines all who will be saved and all who will be eternally damned. Of those who cannot be saved, Surah 2:6-7 states:
It follows that Calvinism and Islam are both inherently fatalistic. In Calvinism, the sovereign God elects those who will be saved and rejects all others, as seen repeatedly in Calvin’s writings:
"Good News" definition: noun. informal, someone or something that is positive, encouraging, uplifting, desirable, or the like.
THERE IS NO GOOD NEWS IN ISLAM OR CALVINISM.
Good news Gospel of Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 2 : 3-6 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people.
Truth in love
Romans 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Romans 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Romans 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Romans 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Philippians 1:28
And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition 👈(Gospel of Christ condemning news) but to you of salvation, and that of God.👈 (Gospel of Christs good news to the elect)
This is a short helpful video ( part 1 and 2 ) on what Jordan and I discussed. Much better then I did.
ruclips.net/video/y2VAT5phffc/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/CMtA_fXgJOo/видео.html
Listened to it.
This idea of a perceptive and decretive will (dual-will nature of God) is espoused nowhere in scripture. It is used ONLY when a verse does not align with the pre-assumed doctrine of irresistible grace as an explanation why God would clearly state something so contrary to what is being interpreted. "God COULD NOT have meant this thing he said because it disagrees with what I'm pretty sure is true, therefore he meant it in a way as to not have it happen, but express how it should happen."
This is called gnositism. Pure and simple. God has revealed much of his will to us through scripture. He has shown us both times where he regrets certain aspects of his creation (his regret having made man to begin with in genesis 6:6-7) and even times where he relents from taking action in response to a plea (Exodus 32:14). There are even times where he said certain things not only were not his decree but didn't even enter his mind (or heart, depending on which translation you lean towards) in Jeremiah 19:5. This idea that God causes all of these things to just happen goes entirely against His own words all throughout scripture. Who causes men to resist the gospel? Is it God? No, it is the devil himself. 2 Coronthians 4:3-4 says that the god of this world blinded the minds of the unbelieving so they will not see the light of the gospel. Do you truly attribute the works of the adversary to God Himself? How is this not blasphemous?
To resolve any final confusion to these points, let me use a single verse that uses the word ALL twice, once in the affirmative of death through sin and then again in affirmation of redemption through Christ likewise coming to all; clearly demonstrating "all" who die are also the same "all" who may be redeemed through Christ.
Romans 5:18 - So then, as through one offense the result was condemnation to ALL mankind, so also through one act of righteousness the result was justification of life to ALL mankind.
I've heard every argument descending into arguments about Greek translation, hebrew study, etc. With other verses but this single verse seems to have practically been given to us as a way to refute any suggestion that limited attonement held any weight whatsoever. The same all, the same word for all translated, user both to describe death to all men coming through Adam and the possibility of life coming to all men through Christ.
@folv6631 Well. Case closed, I guess. Is this called Folvism?
@@davevandervelde597 Point out absolutely any scripture I presented in error and i will genuinely do my best to either defend or, in the case or being found in error, redact and reject any points made. Anything I've said that is contrary to the scriptures themselves should be held against me on every account. I'm not the authority on any of what I've shared, but unlike what I heard in the video presented above I tried to only share what I have read in scripture, citing the scriptures themselves to defend those points. If you have genuine disagreements on anything I've said or the way in which they were presented, please hold it against me and present any contrary positions and your own understanding of those verses so that we can discover the truth together, one way or the other.
@@folv6631 I know I have heard these texts put forward to show God acting in a certain way towards HIs creation. I do actually respect that you have taken the time to lay this out and cause people to think about it. I have done the same thing.
I think Jordan was right when he said that asking questions and then gaslighting people is a very sad reality. People need answers and having people feel stupid to ask is frankly, terrible.
When the Bible is clearly saying what it is saying in one place but then an apparently different statement somewhere else. The problem is this therefore - on many many issues we see what appears to be contradiction. What do theologians do to resolve some of these problems. This is were the root of the problem lies. So if I emphasis one thing more or less then you, then we will each have a different conclusion.
I am not going to try to exegete all those texts but I am going to do that on my own later because you raise some very good concerns with how a Calvinist would handle them.
I would want to just give you something to carefully consider.
Can God make an error that requires or forces Him to make a change in His plans?
If so, since I do hear alot of non calvinists say that the implications of calvinism changes the Biblical character of God . What does the answer to this question do to Gods character ?
Is there any possibility that the God of the Bible who is autonomous ( meaning self law - so He governs Himself ) has created a world where the elements or the creatures in it can also be autonomous?
Is God surprised when something happens in His creation ?
Calvinists are criticized for having a 'systematic theology" but we all have one. You can not make any logical conclusions without having one. About anything.
When you apply your particular hermeneutics and your systematic to the text, there are questions about Gods character that must be applied with in that so you can come to your answer.
Shooting someone 1 or 2 texts to validate a position has taken none of the other factors to bear on the analysis.
For example : If you believe God does need to change His mind since He made a mistake, then He is no different then his creatures ( you and me)
Now you have to decide since the Bible teaches that He is not like you or me. Which one are you going to pick?
You should be nicer to Calvin. He struggled to answer alot of difficult issues. You have the right to disagree. So do I and I do on many things.
thanks I hope you have a great weekend God bless.
@@davevandervelde4799 so, just to clarify, the questions are "can God make an error thst requires him to change His plans" and "if yes, what does this do to the character of God?".
Just to make sure I know what I am answering.
@Great Light Studios - At about minute 30:00 of the video you use a quote from John Calvin (The Eternal Predestination of God) and a discussion of Calvin's use of the word "allow" or "permit" comes up for discussion. David did a good job of pointing out that these comments should be understood in context. In that context, Calvin was responding to a certain strain of Medieval Scholastic thought that held that there was a category in which God "permitted" things He did not "intend" to take place. As if, God is just a "bystander" to events and not their ultimate cause with an intention to bring about these events for some good purpose. It is that idea that Calvin attacks.
Elsewhere, Calvin says this about permission:
*"Following that, since it is so that God willed that His Son might be thus exposed to death, may we not be ashamed of what He endured. May we not think that wicked men were in control and that the Son of God did not have the means to defend Himself. For everything proceeded from the will of God, and from the immutable decree which He had made. That is also why our Lord Jesus says in St. Luke, “Indeed, it is your reign now, and the power of darkness, As if He said, “Take no glory in what you are doing; for the devil is your master.” However, He shows that it is by means of the PERMISSION which God gave them. Although the devil possessed them, nevertheless, neither they nor he could attempt anything unless God had unleashed for them the bridle. That, then, in summary, is how we must have our eyes and all our senses fixed upon the will of God, and upon His eternal plan, when the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ is spoken of to us. Now He declares that such is the will of God, because it is written. "* Cavlin, Sermons on Deity of Christ, Sermon 5, Matt 25:51-66, pp., 88-9.
Here is another speaking on the fall of man:
*"For, in the first place, it must be conceded, that God was not in ignorance of the event which was about to occur; and then, that he could have prevented it, had he seen fit to do so. But in speaking of permission, I understand that he had appointed whatever he wished to be done. Here, indeed, a difference arises on the part of many, who suppose Adam to have been so left to his own free will, that God would not have him fall. They take for granted, what I allow them, that nothing is less probable than that God should he regarded as the cause of sin, which he has avenged with so many and such severe penalties. When I say, however, that Adam did not fall without the ordination and will of God, I do not so take it as if sin had ever been pleasing to Him, or as if he simply wished that the precept which he had given should be violated. So far as the fall of Adam was the subversion of equity, and of well-constituted order, so far as it was contumacy against the Divine Law-giver, and the transgression of righteousness, certainly it was against the will of God; yet none of these things render it impossible that, for a certain cause, although to us unknown, he might will the fall of man. It offends the ears of some, when it is said God willed this fall; but what else, I pray, is the PERMISSION of Him, who has the power of preventing, and in whose hand the whole matter is placed, but his will?"* Calvin, Genesis 3:1-3.
In the story of Job, did God intend for all the things that Satan did to Job before the foundations of the World... so that Satan was just an actor fulfilling Gods desire for evil whilst Job was an actor who God is effectually causing to be blameless and upright....? NO. Book of Job clearly notes Satans had freedom to roam the earth and had the idea/the desire, God gave the boundaries/limit for his evil (extended the boundaries in ch2v6). Job had options to curse God but CHOSE not to. Was it God the Father using Satan as a vessel to tempt Jesus in the wilderness? Permission is not causation.
@@unitedstates3068 - Satan is just an “actor” in the world God created. God has no “desire for evil”. His desire is always to bring about good, sometimes by using evil to demonstrate some good thing. No one doubts Job chose not to curse God. God used Satan to TEST Jesus in the wilderness. God does not tempt. The evil in our heart tempts. God tests (ie puts us in situations) to demonstrate what is in our heart.
@@brentonstanfield5198 I so appreciate your comments. Love to have a coffee sometime. ☺☺
@@davevandervelde4799 - Happy to chat. I’m in the Houston Texas area.
@@brentonstanfield5198 Well thats too bad. I am in London ontario.
For God "so" loved....the world, that it pleased Him to sley His only Begotten Son Jesus Christ, the most horrifically unimaginable evil ever known since creation. Yet, we are thankful to God for this evil, as without God bringing this evil man could not be made "good."
You might say, "God didn't sley His Son, wicked men did." Yes, but scripture shows that every miniscule detail of the the "evils" to be done to Christ was decreed BEFORE creation itself, prophecied by the LORD Himself, and His holy prophets. The EXACT who, what, where, and when, and why of everyone involved WERE DECREED before creation itself. NOTHING WAS DONE from the autonomous will of man. Consider these Truths. Evil is NOT autonomous. Man is NOT autonomous. ONLY God is autonomous. Does the Lord only "allow" evil? No. The LORD controls EVERYTHING about it.
Satan can do NOTHING but what the Lord decrees. Satan can't take one hair more or less off the head of anyone but by the exact decree of God.
There's no evil that happens BUT by the decree of God. He doesn't do it Himself, He uses means, ie angels and men.
Anyone who believes Satan or wicked men are autonomous to do as "they will", are worshipping Satan as more powerful or autonomous than God.
Oh, to the very contrary, you mistakenly attribute the things of Satan to God.
2 Corinthiand 4:3 -4 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this age has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
Luke 8:46 And those by the way side are they that have heard; then comes the Devil, and takes away the word from their heart, that they may not believe and be saved
That is the work of Satan, not the work of God. God did not kill His son, He raised Christ from the dead.
Acts 3:15 “You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead”
Acts 2:23-24 you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead”
God does not out unbelief in anyone's heart according to scripture until the appointed time of the end when he sends a strong delusion to prepare for the final years leading up to His wrath. It is his will that all come to repentance, even if not all who are approached with the Gospel choose to do so.
2 Peter 3:9 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.
You attribute the wicked works of Satan and man (according to scripture) and superimpose them over God which I find extremely perplexing. Can you cite a single verse where God takes ownership of the murder of his own son? It's considered to be one of the most vile acts ever committed, yet you attribute it to God who is good and holy? What verse(s) do you pull this from?
in regards to Job.. who was mentioned.. as to why Satan had to obey God... and then the stated these are hard questions... blah..blah... blah...
No they aren't... One. .thing.. contrary to what many might think... Satan does Not have access to heaven... Nor can Satan SEE God.. any body with half a brain who has studied Job.. and read any commentaries.. and been led by the Holy Spirit... can realizr these things..
Satan heard God's voice.. but Satan after his expulsion.. is NEVER allowed to see God.. visibly... that is part of Satan's curse..
this "council of God" which Satan intruded upon in Job 1:6 .. did Not take place in heaven either. .NOR are we ever told that it did..
this is just a little tid bit. .for any of you bible readers out there.. who want to learn something..