Saved By Faith Or Decree? Answering Calvinism With Geoffrey Robinson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 апр 2024
- Join Jordan Hatfield from Great Light Studios as he sits down with author Geoffrey Robinson to dive into his thought-provoking book, "Saved by Grace through Faith or Saved by Decree?: A Biblical and Theological Critique of Calvinist Soteriology." In this interview, Geoffrey reveals the motivation behind his critical examination of Calvinism, sharing insights that led him to question and ultimately challenge this theological framework. Together, Jordan and Geoffrey unpack the TULIP acronym-Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints-exploring the core doctrines of Calvinism and discussing the problems and controversies that accompany them.
Get the book here: www.amazon.com/s?k=saved+by+d...
Watch more from Jordan on the topic of Calvinism:
Jordan Hatfield: Calvinism Is Not True: • Calvinism Is Not True
Does Romans 9 Teach Calvinism?: • Non-Calvinist Explanat...
Does Ephesians 1:4 Teach Calvinism?: • Is Calvinism Biblical?...
Who Are God's Sheep? Responding To John Piper and Calvinism: • Responding To John Pip...
Calvinism Debate: Jordan Has A Friendly Debate With A Calvinist • Is Calvinism True And ...
A Critical Error In Calvinism Part 1: • Union With Christ - A ...
A Critical Error In Calvinism Part 2: • Union With Christ - A ...
Is Calvinism Biblical with Leighton Flowers / Soteriology 101
Watch more of my videos answering Calvinism here: • Answering Calvinism (N...
SUPPORT:
You can support Great Light Studios and 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 FILMS:
Fear Not Only Believe: • Christian Short Films ...
Metamorphosis (Ex-Drug Dealer Testimony): • Metamorphosis | From D...
Seek First (Freedom From Anxiety And Fear): • Seek First | Christian...
CONTACT US: contact@greatlightstudios.com
WEBSITE: greatlightstudios.com/
PODCAST: greatlight.podbean.com/
INSTAGRAM: / greatlightstudios
FACEBOOK: / greatlightstudios
PATREON: / greatlightstudios
MERCH: great-light-studios.creator-s...
PayPal Donation: bit.ly/3nN2nYD 
Развлечения
My son is attending a Calvinist church and has somehow manage to marry the preachers daughter. At first on the surface it all seemed so good. I had no idea what a Calvinist was until just a few weeks ago.My son has been slipping away from the family and starting telling us we are not true Christian’s. Of course he said all this to us with great love and kindness. Lol. However it left me shocked and highly concerned. I have learned a great deal about TULIP now and can see what has happened to him. I’m find myself trying to defend my salvation to him and my heart is broken over this. All the scriptures I use to counter his only leads us to going in circles. I just ordered Mr. Robinson’s book in hopes to learn how to better communicate with him. Thank you for this video.
I’m sorry to hear that. My son and I also had a falling away over this but God is restoring our relationship. He’s still in the Calvinistic church that I left so I just pray for him. But I hear you. It’s painful.
SO SORRY TO HEAR
Sorry that you dont understand God's sovereign choice before the foundation of the world.
@@abuelb non Calvinists believe in and firmly believe in God’s sovereignty and His decretal choice, we just believe the scripture defines it in such a way that shows God’s sovereignty is to make the new covenant available to be received by faith, by anyone who believes in Jesus and trusts Him as Savior. God sovereignty choose to elect whoever believes by faith, and He will condemn unbelievers. And we also affirm His full omniscience. God Bless
We are saved by both secree and choice. God decreed us to have the uncanny ability to freely choose Him.
“Uncanny” Love it. You could almost call it “divine”
Do you mean God decreed for us to aquire salvation by believing in Jesus?
God decrees to give us freedom to choose Him and His ways or to not choose Him. Doesn't take away His sovereignty, it shows He can bring about His ultimate will even when allowing us to do our own will.
If God had chosen to reveal the names of the 2 people in Revelation 20:10, would that have been proof to you of unconditional damnation?
Revelation 20:10 NKJV
[10] The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.
@@JesusIsLord777-lz7mg 2 people would mean God unconditionally elects all? Hardly. Episodes in scripture where God steps in and overrides man’s will serve to show he is sovereign but do not teach that’s what he does all the time. These are the exceptions not the rule.
Such a good show with lots of good insights into Scripture. I believe that these discussions are necessary because if one believes in Calvinism it affects his "world view." It affects the way one sees other image bearers who are not "elect." If it is believed totally and carried out in daily living it leads to nihilism and absolute and utter despair. It changes the way we view our heavenly Father. What we "believe" that Scripture tells us about God will absolutely shape us as people and how we move through this world. They turn man into something that I believe moves beyond the Scripture. There was so much to love about this conversation. I will probably listen to it again!! Thank you 🙂
very agree, Calvinism misleading people, changed their "world view".
God decreed that we would be saved through faith🙌🏻
I’m glad someone is interviewing these authors. Please also interview Ken Wilson.
as a former Calvinist to me a big whole in there system is there view of what it means to be an image bearer or Michael Heisers term "imagers"...... yes you can get wierd and unbiblical with what it means to be made in His likeness but we should stand in awe and praise as to what it does mean to be an image barer and love Jesus the one who willingly became the God-Man.
yes, agree, Calvinism doctrine weird and unbiblical.
Amen! Thank you for sharing Michael. I love hearing these testimonies. May I ask what it was for you that first made you start questioning Calvinism and ultimately leave that way of viewing our Lord? Again, Praise God!
@@elaineauo We had/have a son with a life threating disease that made it hard to go to our Calvinistic church so I was able to step out of the bubble. Also questions of evil and Gods goodness and what that means if he is completely and utterly in control of every minute detail of everything including horrendous unspeakable evil that happens to the most vulnerable of humans. Calvinism answer is pretty terrible.... I dont write this with a bunch of anger. Blessings
@@michealmatt2259 wow. Thanks for sharing your testimony with me, my brother!! I pray the Lord bless you guys and your child!
Love this book and have relied on it many times to refute Calvinistic presuppositions. What a great resource he has created!
Dr. Robinson's explanation very clear, thanks.😊👍🌷
Thank you Jordan for this informative video! Very much appreciated .
The answer is YES!
I'm sort of like Mr. Robinson in that I don't just accept things because someone tells me to accept it. But I was a Calvinist for a while. And at that time I was more open to hearing from others. I reject Calvinism now, but I still have Calvinists in my family. I'm far less happier now because I feel like I am more conflicted at church. I finally found a non-Calvinist church to attend, but I'm struggling to open myself up to what God is wanting in my life. I was a happy Calvinist, until the nagging questions I had turned out to not have good answers from the Calvinist perspective. I hope to be a happy non-Calvinist some day, but so far all I can put together is the non-Calvinist half of that equation.
Nice question save by faith or decree.
Spoiler alert: It is both.
Other spoiler alert: You can get there in just two wonderful assurance scriptures from the NT.
Bonus other spoiler alert: You can get there in just two wondeful OT verses as well.
Your fun homework: You can easily find them in the Bible.
@@Gablesman888 how it is both? Are you saying 2 ways to have salvation?
Save by faith = meaning you having faith in God.
& decree = God from His arbitrary choosing.
Is that right?
@@daddada2984 No, it is wrong.
1. Start with total depravity. The default spiritual condition of all mankind is original sin, thus without Christ we are all deserving of Hell. That is God's justice upon sinful man.
2. But God chooses to exercise mercy on a few. Not all. Everyone else (see #1 again) deserves justice. And btw, it is blasphemy against God the Father to insinuate that God's election of those who receive mercy is somehow arbitrary. Anytime one chooses to curse God's attributes like that they are blaspheming God. End of discussion.
3. God chooses those who will get mercy before the foundation of the world. The Bible is replete with all manners of verses that support this that I assume you can easily look up. Get stuck, let me know, and I will help you if you like.
4. For the Christian, there is a point at which God monergistically regenerates the lost person by grace, giving them the saving faith to believe in Christ. This is Ephesians 2:8-9, et al.
5. The newborn Christian is through the Holy Spirit a new creature with a completely new "want to". "Old things have passed away." What the Reformers called "affections" (although there is more to this but I am keeping it simple).
6. Angry at this salvation plan of God, occasionally you will hear that those who are not chosen for mercy are chosen for damnation. Such is not the case because of #1 above. God is not only not the author of evil, He does not have to create fresh evil in the persons not chosen (the lost). God simply passes over them. God simply lets Adolf be Adolf (per #1 above). God's justice remains God's justice.
@@daddada2984Gablesman believes that God willed and predetermined EVERYTHING and that NOTHING comes about but exactly what God infallibly decreed. So he can’t make a distinction with a difference between faith or decree. Faith is just another decree like EVERYTHING else…….
@@JohnK557 so God decree to other to kill babies for fun & then send them to hell?
God decree to rape, murder & then send them to hell?
Maybe God decree me to not believe in you.
Excellent discussion. I have yet another book to add to my reading list. 😊👍
Yes
This was really insightful and interesting thank you brothers in Christ!
I believe that if salvation were by decree alone, faith would not be needed for salvation and God would have declared it so, yet faith is the active ingredient he blesses us all with, to either make a decision for or against life eternal with Christ. All 66 Books do an amazing job of proving salvation is by Grace through Faith.
Faith is a gift.
Jordon, your awesome,
Sit less , move more
😌
Are you suggesting that I need to exercise more? 😅
Watching from India🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳
It’s obviously again that we really have to love truth and seek it wholeheartedly in spite of the danger to have another understanding than the people we admire. That’s a huge issue in Christianity. The main reason people refuse to critically listen is their reverence for men -like the Pharisees.
Yep. That is so true.
I wish I had recommended this book and author to you first! Got halfway through the ebook version and had to get a physical copy, which I'm still reading and marking up. Good interview, and hopefully can have him back again!
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼Great Video
Very good show. Unique perspectives by the author. Very good takes, and intelligent refutations of Calvinism.
I like the author, very Biblically explain things. 😊👍
Excellent video, Jordan. Geoffrey brought out exactly the way I was taught by Calvinism. I call it worm theology.
Thanks for sharing Janet! May I ask what it was that had you first questioning Calvinism and leaving that system? I am always so encouraged to hear these testimonies of people leaving Calvinism and clinging to the truth about our merciful and wonderful God. Praise God!
@@elaineauo I never liked it as a child. My parents had some rules that didn’t make sense, and when I questioned them, they were based on their beliefs, such as having to be home by midnight on Saturday. It seemed I was always searching for something else, for the love of God, which I never heard in my Reformed church. When I met my husband, who was Baptist, I heard the good news of the gospel for the first time! Astonished that God could love me, I asked a lot of questions the next few years, finally coming to realize that Jesus was offering me salvation, and that I would be a fool to resist any longer. When I submitted at the cross, I literally felt the walls around my heart breaking. He has been faithfully sanctifying me ever since, for 38 years! I am still growing, loving the things of God more and more. Listening to pastors on RUclips has really helped.
Romans 2:14- Why do people assume Paul is talking past the Roman church instead of addressing Jews and Gentiles in it? Having, “the Law written in their hearts,” was the OT promise of NT salvation and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, not the natural state of man. I would think it strange for Paul, a trained Jewish theologian, to accidentally borrow from such promise of OT scripture and re-caste it to mean something else.
The idea that Paul does this is actually central to Calvinist interpretation for concepts like NONE SEEK AFTER GOD. Everything the OT says on that subject, including the 2 Psalms Paul quotes from, violates Calvinism and they have to assume that Paul is somehow bring clarity or even re-writing the clear foundation that God SEEKS the humble and contrite, and rewards those that SEEK Him, and the 2 Psalms speaks of the FOLL THAT REJECTS GOD.
A frequently cited objection against the doctrine of limited atonement is that it undermines evangelism. All orthodox Christians, Calvinists included, believe and teach that the atonement of Jesus Christ is to be proclaimed to all men. We are to say that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life. The misconception exists that because Calvinists believe in the doctrine of limited atonement, they have no passion to go out and preach the cross to everyone. Calvinists have been careful since Augustine to insist that the gospel is to be offered to all men-even though we know that not everyone will respond to it. Many Calvinists have been zealous evangelists.
The doctrine of limited atonement, in reality, is helpful in evangelism. The Calvinist knows that not everyone will respond to the gospel message, but he also knows with certainty that some will respond to it. By contrast, the Arminian doesn’t know that not everyone will respond. In the Arminian’s mind, it’s a theoretical possibility that everybody will repent and believe. However, the Arminian also must deal with the possibility that no one will respond. He can only hope that his gospel presentation will be so persuasive that the unbeliever, lost and dead in his trespasses and sins, will choose to cooperate with divine grace so as to take advantage of the benefits offered in the atonement.
If we can get past such perceived problems with the doctrine of limited atonement, we can begin to see the glory of it-that the atonement Christ made on the cross was real and effectual. It wasn’t just a hypothetical atonement. It was an actual atonement. He didn’t offer a hypothetical expiation for the sins of His people; their sins were expiated. He didn’t give a hypothetical propitiation for our sins; He actually placated God’s wrath toward us. By contrast, according to the other view, the atonement is only a potentiality. Jesus went to the cross, paid the penalty for sin, and made the atonement, but now He sits in heaven wringing His hands and hoping that someone will take advantage of the work He performed. This is foreign to the biblical understanding of the triumph and the victory Christ achieved in His atoning death.
In His High Priestly Prayer in John 17:6-9a, Jesus said:
I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You. . . . They have . . . known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me. I pray for them.
This was Jesus, the Savior, speaking here. Notice that He said He was praying for His disciples-not for the world. In the most poignant prayer of intercession He offered in this world as our High Priest, Jesus explicitly said He was not praying for everybody. Instead, He was praying for the elect.
There is a plan of God designed for your salvation. It is not an afterthought or an attempt to correct a mistake.
Is it conceivable that Jesus would be willing to die for the whole world but not pray for the whole world? That doesn’t make sense. He was being consistent. He had come to lay down His life for His sheep. He was going to die for His people, and He made it clear here that those were the ones for whom He was about to die. There is no question here of indiscrimination. Jesus was about to make atonement, and that atonement would be effective for everyone for whom He intended it to be effective.
If you are of the flock of Christ, one of His lambs, then you can know with certainty that an atonement has been made for your sins. You may wonder how you can know you’re numbered among the elect. I cannot read your heart or the secrets of the Lamb’s Book of Life, but Jesus said: “‘My sheep hear My voice’” (John 10:27a). If you want Christ’s atonement to avail for you, and if you put your trust in that atonement and rely on it to reconcile you to almighty God, in a practical sense, you don’t need to worry about the abstract questions of election. If you put your trust in Christ’s death for your redemption and you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, then you can be sure that the atonement was made for you. That, more than anything else, will settle for you the question of the mystery of God’s election. Unless you’re elect, you won’t believe on Christ; you won’t embrace the atonement or rest on His shed blood for your salvation. If you want it, you can have it. It is offered to you if you believe and if you trust.
One of the sweetest statements from the lips of Jesus in the New Testament is this: “‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world’” (Matt. 25:34b). There is a plan of God designed for your salvation. It is not an afterthought or an attempt to correct a mistake. Rather, from all eternity, God determined that He would redeem for Himself a people, and that which He determined to do was, in fact, accomplished in the work of Jesus Christ, His atonement on the cross. Your salvation has been accomplished by a Savior Who is not merely a potential Savior but an actual Savior, One Who did for you what the Father determined He should do. He is your Surety, your Mediator, your Substitute, your Redeemer. He atoned for your sins on the cross.
With all due respect, how do you know you're one of the redeemed?
Just because you're believing today doesn't mean you will be tomorrow, or 30 years from now.
According to Calvinism, you would have never been a true Christian, since the elect will persevere in faith.
It only would have been a ruse played upon you by a capricious God, since only he determines who is saved and not saved.
Your faith in Christ would not have been a real faith, only an illusion.
Calvinist seem to miss the fact that Lazarus was a believer when he died, and prior to him being brought back there were multiple references to the resurrection of believers.
I've long held onto the concept of total depravity, yet grappling with the notion of resistible grace for all was a challenge. Observing how many non-Calvinists dismiss total depravity made me question the validity of those alternative viewpoints, which I consider a significant weakness for non-Calvinist theology. Fortunately, I discovered that true classical Arminianism actually upholds total depravity and offers a coherent explanation of its compatibility with prevenient grace.
Don't assume the choice is binary
@swu11 It’s rarely displayed as an option in these conversations.
@@icoreyr point being Scripture authority is Jesus's word, then it all comes down to the truth revealed by interpretation or the lack of. The emphercise of context is what exegesis must follow and obey. Consider watching BTF, Living Christian, Faith on fire, Idol killer etc. They all presented themselves as neither Amanian nor Calvinist.
@@swu11 I've seen and subscribed to a few of those channels. However, at this point, I'm just convinced that the classical arminian perspective appears to be the most objective.
@@swu11 Why are you against Arminian theology?
What does it mean that Jesus is the author and perfector of our faith
Romans 5: Calvinists also refuse to make the correlation between the GRACE received in the later verses and the GRACE WE NOW STAND IN, in verse 2 which Paul specifically stated happens THROUGH FAITH in the same verse!
You can’t even get Calvinism from core Calvinist scriptures without Calvinist lenses.
The meaning of words like All, world and many, must be understood through the lens of Calvinism for Calvinism to survive.
Calvinism is the chicken, and the Word is the egg. Which comes first?
Neither🤔
Replying to the thumbnail picture alone..
We are saved by Gods Grace and love purchased by the blood of his son jesus Christ.
And he works it through faith, but the faith does not save us.
Of course I believe you meant that as well.
Of course depending on context and your definitions decree could be there as well, but its not force salvation.
So the book is being praised even as it begins by a complete misapprehension of Calvinism…
As some of the comments above indicate, even non-Calvinists might affirm both of these… was thinking of buying this book but based on how this begins, it wouldn’t bode well for non-Calvinist literature..
everyone seems to assume satan is going to be horrid. if i go to hell then GOD
is "punishing me" for my sins, but why would satan want to punish me too? satan despises
christians. if i'm being punished by satan, then satan is doing god's work - that makes zero
sense. hell is more likely to be eternity having more fun than you ever could on earth, this
is what god hates, heaven will just be eternal worship, satan is SAVING you from an eternity
of boredom and slavery. i see no reason why hell wouldn't be a great place to be, no mind
control, no ten commandments to follow, just eternal life that you can probably quit if you
get bored with learning guitar from hendrix or trying to grasp relativity from einstein. why
would hell be undesirable? why would satan want to torment me - he detests god and christians,
not sinners.
I think Perseverance of the Saints is used to measure the genuineness of a person’s salvation, as well. That’s what I heard as a kid in a Reformed ichurch.
I think we need to refresh it. Saved by Jesus through belief in what He has already done. Otherwise it sounds like we are saying, "our faith" saves us and it doesn't.
Great point. Our focus must stay on what God accomplished on the cross.
@@davevandervelde4799amen! It’s faith IN HIM. Every blessing is in him, Ephesians 1.
@@an_nie_dyc1386 And He choose "us"
@@davevandervelde4799and by “us” he means everyone.
@@TheRomans9GuyslSo everyone is chosen for salvation and others not chosen for damnation?
I wonder if Piper would say the atheist soldier laying on a hand grenade to protect his friends and dying in the process is sinful.
The answer is yes. That soldier is sinful as is ALL of humanity. That does not mean he did not make a genuine sacrificial act by falling on the handgrenade, but was it done out of faith towards God? Not according to your example.... and anything that is not of faith is sin.
That would not stop me from being thankful for that soldier and his sacrifice and my earnest prayer would be that just maybe in that last split second God might have regenerated him and saved him by grace. If not it would be a sad thought, but it might be that God's purpose was still fulfilled using the unbelieving soldier's sacrifice to save others who may have their faith strengthened or may later be granted saving faith.
I have a few questions for this gentleman.
1. Does he see covenant theology and the Historic redemptive narrative as the proper method to understand scripture since " types of Christ" are throughout the text ? i.e. Moses, David, Samson
2. Is God simply now watching and hoping in HIs creation or is He absolutely in control of all events as the Bible teaches?
3. Did Paul exaggerate his sinful condition when he said he is the chief among sinners? Or how about David in Psalm 51 when he recognizes his need for God to not remove his Spirit from him? Do slaves free themselves?
What do you mean specifically by “covenant theology and historic redemptive narrative”?
Not sure.
Yes.
Yes.
@@emilybrereton702
ruclips.net/video/fhu2Vl41lLA/видео.html
The best way to understand the sinful nature of man is to exegete Romans 1-3. It was Paul who describe man in Romans 3:10-18 and the ground for man's salvation by grace or as a gift, not faith.
According to Paul in the end of that chapter, and in the very next chapter describe how we gain access to that grace?
@@Narikkuprecisely. That grace is a gift, by faith in Christ Jesus. Romans 3:24
I'm not a Calvinist, but I need to answer the author's assertions about Original Sin
1.) The assertion that Augustine "invented" Original Sin is simply not true. Irenaeus, Cyprian, Gregory of Nazianzus (who btw was in the Eastern Church), St Basil of Caesarea, and St. Hilary of Poitiers, all of whom preceded Augustine, taught the doctrine of Original Sin. In fact, the concept of baptismal regeneration, universally taught by the early church, presupposes, by default, the idea of Original Sin implicitly. The notion of people being "born innocent" is an innovation that came much later in history.
2.) Original Sin is not simply a "Calvinist" doctrine. Rome, Lutheranism, Arminianism (both traditional and Wesleyan) all subscribe to Original Sin, even if their definitions are not precisely the same on every nuance of the term.
3.) Pelagius was deemed a heretic, not just by Augustine, but by the Early Church as a whole. He believed one could be saved without grace (basically salvation by works/obedience), and believed one could attain a sinless perfection.
4.) To believe that Original Sin is false presupposes that it is theoretically possible for somebody to grow up and never sin, thus nullifying the Scriptural doctrine that all humanity is in need of the atoning work of Jesus Christ.
Great comments .
Can you substantiate any of these counterclaims?
Perhaps with any quotes from the early church you can provide that support original sin and inherited guilt, rather than ancestral sin?
Can you provide any record of Pelagius himself actually affirming what we have come to call pelagianism, or are you just repeating this as something that should be assumed? And what of Pelagius having been declared Orthodox after that time?
Can you explain the assertion that a rejection of Original sin is an implicit affirmation that someone could grow up to not need the work of Christ for salvation?
@@joshuadavidson7985 As you wish:
Irenaeus
“But this man . . . is Adam, if the truth be told, the first-formed man. . . . We, however, are all from him; and as we are from him, we have inherited his title [of sin]” (Against Heresies 3:23:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).’
“Indeed, through the first Adam we offended God by not observing his command. Through the second Adam, however, we are reconciled, and are made obedient even unto death [Rom. 8:36, 2 Cor. 5:18-19]. For we were debtors to none other except to him, whose commandment we transgressed at the beginning” (ibid., 5:16:3.)
Tertullian
“On account of his [Adam’s] transgression man was given over to death; and the whole human race, which was infected by his seed, was made the transmitter of condemnation” (The Testimony of the Soul 3:2 [inter A.D. 197-200]).
“‘Because by a man came death, by a man also comes resurrection’ [Romans 5:17]. Here by the word ‘man,’ who consists of a body, as we have often shown already, I understand that it is a fact that Christ had a body. And if we are all made to live in Christ as we were made to die in Adam, then, as in the flesh we were made to die in Adam, so also in the flesh are we made to live in Christ” (Against Marcion 5:9:5 [inter A.D. 207-212]).
Origen
“The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants [Matt. 19:14; Luke 18:15-16; Acts 2:38-39]. For the apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stain of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit” [Titus 3:5] (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 244]).
“Everyone in the world falls prostrate under sin. And it is the Lord who sets up those who are cast down and who sustains all who are falling. In Adam all die, and thus the world falls prostrate and requires to be set up again, so that in Christ all may be made to live” (Homilies on Jeremiah 8:1 [post A.D. 244]).
Irenaeus
And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so is it rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience having been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way the sin of the first created man receives amendment by the correction of the First-begotten, and the coming of the serpent is conquered by the harmlessness of the dove, those bonds being unloosed by which we had been fast bound to death. (Adv. Haer., V, 19)
St. Cyprian
…how much rather ought we to shrink from hindering an infant, who, being lately born, has not sinned, except in that, being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth, who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception of the forgiveness of sins-that to him are remitted, not his own sins, but the sins of another.
St Hilary
Having been sent in a flesh in the likeness of that of sin, He did not have sin in the same way that He had flesh. But as all flesh comes from sin, that is, it derives from the sin of Adam the progenitor, He has been sent in a flesh similar to that of sin, because in Him sin does not subsist, but the image of sinful flesh.
St Ambrose
Reason is the food of the mind, and a noble and sweet nourishment, which does not burden the body, and changes not into something shameful in nature, but into something glorious, when the wallowing place of lust is changed into the temple of God, and the inn of vices begins to be the shrine of virtues. This takes place when the flesh, returning to its nature, recognizes the nurse of its strength and, putting aside the boldness of its obstinacy, is joined to the will of the regulating soul-such as it was when it received the secrets of dwelling in paradise, before it was infected with the poison of the pestilent Serpent and knew that wicked hunger, and through gluttonous greed brushed aside the memory of the divine commandment which inhered in the senses of the soul. It is hence, we are told, that sin flowed from body and soul as though from its parents; the nature of the body being tempted, the soul suffered with the body’s disorderly health. For, if it had restrained the appetite of the body, the soul would have destroyed in its very beginning the origin of sin; but the soul, in its now corrupt vigor, heavy with burdens not its own, gave birth to sin as though in an evil pregnancy by the action of the male, the body.
Regarding Pelagius: that he was roundly condemned by the Council of Carthage, by Rome AND by the Eastern Orthodox, I would respond that the burden of proof falls on those supporting Pelagius to show 1.) whether or not he was falsely accused (an odd conclusion considering that his condemnation was so widely accepted) and 2.) whether or not he is in line with orthodox Christianity.
Regarding the rejection of Original Sin: to believe that a man is born innocent (as provisionalists claim) is to teach, however weakly, that perfectionism is possible. If perfectionism is not possible, then you hold to a variant of Original Sin, even if it is not precisely the Augustinian variant (or the classic variant, as I have demonstrated with the quotes above that the idea did not start with Augustine).
@@Outrider74
Amen!
@@joshuadavidson7985 I put up a post the other day. Did it not come through?
The title sets up a false dichotomy. Everything exists by decree, because once there was nothing but God (unless you believe God creates experimentally). Even fallen angels are permitted to exist, and what is the permission of God but the exercise of his decree?
Salvation is by decree because it was wrought in God "before the foundation of the world". To say all that was decreed was our freedom of choice-making suggests the creation of the church (a people in Christ Jesus) was left up to happenstance - it could be otherwise by the same mechanism it is, our autonomous choice.
Paul deals with this idea of man being a victim of divine decree in Romans 9, and he doesn't resolve it with philosophy. He says, "Who are you oh man, the one answering back to God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why have you made me thus?"
I love your videos on WMSCOG issues, but on this issue you are wrong, friend.
It's not either or. It's both. God chose to redeem the elect by giving them faith. We are saved by grace (decree) through faith, and that (faith) is not of yourself. It is a gift of God.
The salvation by faith is the gift because we all have a chance at it and it’s free.
How can we know for sure that the “that” is about faith and not the entire phrase “saved by grace through faith” being the gift. The gift might be the salvation with the way it is said.
@@emilybrereton702 because Paul says right after "and that is not from yourself" Eph. 2:8. Why would someone think that the gift was from themselves? Or why would someone think that the grace was from themselves? The only thing someone may take credit for is the faith, which Paul says is not of yourself, so that no man may boast.
@@philipmurray9796no
one can boast about the “ objective salvation for all” gift.
The satan is quite manifest in this particular youtube video present in the
Cult of calvin sheep bleating
@@truthseeker5698 someone will boast about a salvation for all gift? Okay.....
Sin Nature: After raising 6 children, I can say that humans are born with a desire to test EVERY boundary placed before them.
from the moment we can crawl we will find the one uncovered outlet and try to test it. Mom/dad says no, so we will wait until we have the chance and get zapped.
Do we learn the NO is for our protection? No we do not! When we get tall enough we see the glowing stove. When mom/dad say NO, what do we do?
"Calvinism's hermeneutic is flawed" and he could not even properly exegete John 3:16 .
ruclips.net/video/BDxRss_v78A/видео.html
Calvinists don’t believe in believing
Really not that hard...
God decrees the end as well as the means.
Read Calvin. Institutes, commentaries (Torrance editions), sermons. You won't find a cold determinist. Read the Westminster Confession, the Puritans. Same thing
Blessings,
Stone Cold. Brrrr
freezing cold.
@@whiteshadow6601 Frozen Tundra. It's an ice age.😆
@@SheepDog1974 What have you read by Calvin?
@@whiteshadow6601 what have you read by Calvin?
These guys do not understand the biblical doctrine of grace. So, let's use scripture. And the Bible's logic. First, a conditional gift is not a gift. The key issue is that these guys do not understand grace. God's grace. One needs to look no further than Ephesians 2: 8-9.
First, what is grace? Is it a requirement from God? Is grace a debt that God somehow owes mankind? No, it is a gift as the Ephesians passage clearly says.
Second, who is giving this gift? Well, the Bible clearly says grace is a gift of God.
Third, when speaking of a gift, God's gift of grace, exactly who alone in the Ephesians chapter possesses the donative intent and ability to give the gift? Why God, of course.
Fourth, then who alone possesses and controls all of the circumstances about how the gift, if given at all, is dispensed to whomever the gift is given? In other words, who decides whether the gift is given at all, when it is given, how it is given, etc? God is the sole controller about the gift.
Fifth, is grace even a gift at all and if not, then what is it? The Bible says there is nothing we as lousy sinners can do to require God to give us this gift, nothing we can do to deserve it , work for it, wish for it, pay for it. And if we could perform any of these works, then it would not be a gift at all but a debt duly owed to us for services rendered.
The understanding of grace is at the center of the biblical doctrine of God's sovereign election unto salvation. God decides who is saved and when and how they are saved.
Once you understand this doctrine you will see it on practically every page of the Bible. And you will see the difference between God's grace and God's beneficence. "The rain falls on the just and the unjust". God's salvation, His grace, is not given to everyone by God's own choice. John 17: "I do not pray for the world". [Jesus praying]. God's own election.
Why? We do not know, but the Bible clearly says it, although God tips His hand when the Bible speaks of God doing things based on His pleasure and His sovereign purposes. Romans 8 and 9.
If a person claiming to be a Christian does not accept what the Bible says about grace, then that person must look themselves in the mirror and ask, "Just how self righteous was I before salvation"?
Jonathan Edwards said that the only thing we bring to Christ in salvation is our sin which makes our salvation necessary. Was your salvation necessary? What did you bring to the table? Now do you care to boast about anything you may have brought?
Hi @Gablesman888 , do you think it's fair to distinguish between meritorious actions and non-meritorious actions? I feel like we have to distinguish between them, because if we say that all actions are meritorious, then, for example, any action, like the simple action of listening to someone tell you about the gospel, or the act of "confessing with your mouth" the Lord Jesus Christ, becomes meritorious. (In fact, I'd argue that the word "work" means "meritorious action.") If we allow that distinction, then we would say that God's grace can be conditional on non-meritorious actions, but it can't be conditional on meritorious actions (i.e. "gift of God, not of works"). Can we say that a free-will faith is just accepting the gift that is offered to you, which is a non-meritorious action, and hence not a work?
@@ZachClark795 Your argument is similar to that same argument made by the late Christopher Hitchens and other atheists about man's free will, et al. I do not blog long treatises on RUclips especially since people do not read them anyway, so I will greatly simplify here.
Basically, while man does have a free will, it is not free because of original sin. Think of a computer lacking important apps in order to function. Man lacks the app to do good works that are righteous in God's sight. For salvation to occur, God must step in and monergistically change the "want to" in the doomed sinner, installing (imputing) righteousness and giving the formerly lost sinner new desires, and a new want to. In effect, saving that person.
Lost and saved man both have a free will to do many things: perform bypass surgery, hit a triple, have sex, hold up a bank. God "decrees" such activity in that he does not appear to interfere with the conduct, even when sinful. But the important word is not decree, but "ordain". The easy definition of ordain is to "use it".
There are no maverick molecules in God's universe. Otherwise, God would not be in control. Two big examples of this truth appear in the Bible (and many others), one in the OT, the other in the NT. The first is in Genesis 50 where Joseph tells his brothers that their selling him into slavery was meant for evil, but God meant it for good. The second is in the NT where God uses the actions of Judas and others to kill Jesus, yet look at the eternal good established in those acts.
Finally, there are many more Bible passages that support everything said here (you can look them up), but I would also direct you to Chapter 3 of the Westminster Confession. The WCF is not the Bible but a restatement of Bible truths like a really great sermon, though better.
God bless you in your studies.
Misinterpretation of Ephesians 2: 8-9. The Greek grammar in that passage does not indicate that faith is the gift but rather that the salvation is a gift.
Typical misunderstandings of Calvinism here in this comment.
Remember to how they pointed out that in some part Augustine's ignorance of Greek and dependence on the Vulgate which was misinterpreted at the critical passage of Romans 5:12; "because all sin", is the correct translation. Imputation is not taught here.
@@martinfroelich7193 As for worrying about Greek versus Vulgate construction, that step is wholly unnecessary since all one TODAY has to do is look at the Greek (not Latin) manuscripts. My opinion is that Jordan is a false teacher who uses deflection to fool the fools. Notice how Jordan consistently relies on "I think", "my opinion is", etc., instead of first actually going to the scripture.
Now let's look at Ephesians 2:8-9. Without writing a treatise, since nobody reads long blogs (I certainly do not), the verses say "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God", etc. In Greek construction the "that" is both the "grace" and the "faith". They are both the gift of God. They are both the instruments of salvation.
If you do not get that I can only pray that one day you will. Beyond that, we will just have to agree to disagree. Amen.
@@Gablesman888 the Greek does not necessarily identify the antecedent of the gift to be faith. We also know from scriptures Paul contrasts salvation by faith vss works, so there is no way faith can be considered a work or merit. Faith is nowhere identified as a work in Scripture. This is a big error of Calvinism. The only way you could get there theologically is by insisting depravity has its calvinist definition ie total inability to respond to the gospel. Then and only then could you constitute faith as a gift of regeneration to the elect.
A frequently cited objection against the doctrine of limited atonement is that it undermines evangelism. All orthodox Christians, Calvinists included, believe and teach that the atonement of Jesus Christ is to be proclaimed to all men. We are to say that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes on Him should not perish but have everlasting life. The misconception exists that because Calvinists believe in the doctrine of limited atonement, they have no passion to go out and preach the cross to everyone. Calvinists have been careful since Augustine to insist that the gospel is to be offered to all men-even though we know that not everyone will respond to it. Many Calvinists have been zealous evangelists.
The doctrine of limited atonement, in reality, is helpful in evangelism. The Calvinist knows that not everyone will respond to the gospel message, but he also knows with certainty that some will respond to it. By contrast, the Arminian doesn’t know that not everyone will respond. In the Arminian’s mind, it’s a theoretical possibility that everybody will repent and believe. However, the Arminian also must deal with the possibility that no one will respond. He can only hope that his gospel presentation will be so persuasive that the unbeliever, lost and dead in his trespasses and sins, will choose to cooperate with divine grace so as to take advantage of the benefits offered in the atonement.
If we can get past such perceived problems with the doctrine of limited atonement, we can begin to see the glory of it-that the atonement Christ made on the cross was real and effectual. It wasn’t just a hypothetical atonement. It was an actual atonement. He didn’t offer a hypothetical expiation for the sins of His people; their sins were expiated. He didn’t give a hypothetical propitiation for our sins; He actually placated God’s wrath toward us. By contrast, according to the other view, the atonement is only a potentiality. Jesus went to the cross, paid the penalty for sin, and made the atonement, but now He sits in heaven wringing His hands and hoping that someone will take advantage of the work He performed. This is foreign to the biblical understanding of the triumph and the victory Christ achieved in His atoning death.
In His High Priestly Prayer in John 17:6-9a, Jesus said:
I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You. . . . They have . . . known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me. I pray for them.
This was Jesus, the Savior, speaking here. Notice that He said He was praying for His disciples-not for the world. In the most poignant prayer of intercession He offered in this world as our High Priest, Jesus explicitly said He was not praying for everybody. Instead, He was praying for the elect.
There is a plan of God designed for your salvation. It is not an afterthought or an attempt to correct a mistake.
Is it conceivable that Jesus would be willing to die for the whole world but not pray for the whole world? That doesn’t make sense. He was being consistent. He had come to lay down His life for His sheep. He was going to die for His people, and He made it clear here that those were the ones for whom He was about to die. There is no question here of indiscrimination. Jesus was about to make atonement, and that atonement would be effective for everyone for whom He intended it to be effective.
If you are of the flock of Christ, one of His lambs, then you can know with certainty that an atonement has been made for your sins. You may wonder how you can know you’re numbered among the elect. I cannot read your heart or the secrets of the Lamb’s Book of Life, but Jesus said: “‘My sheep hear My voice’” (John 10:27a). If you want Christ’s atonement to avail for you, and if you put your trust in that atonement and rely on it to reconcile you to almighty God, in a practical sense, you don’t need to worry about the abstract questions of election. If you put your trust in Christ’s death for your redemption and you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, then you can be sure that the atonement was made for you. That, more than anything else, will settle for you the question of the mystery of God’s election. Unless you’re elect, you won’t believe on Christ; you won’t embrace the atonement or rest on His shed blood for your salvation. If you want it, you can have it. It is offered to you if you believe and if you trust.
One of the sweetest statements from the lips of Jesus in the New Testament is this: “‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world’” (Matt. 25:34b). There is a plan of God designed for your salvation. It is not an afterthought or an attempt to correct a mistake. Rather, from all eternity, God determined that He would redeem for Himself a people, and that which He determined to do was, in fact, accomplished in the work of Jesus Christ, His atonement on the cross. Your salvation has been accomplished by a Savior Who is not merely a potential Savior but an actual Savior, One Who did for you what the Father determined He should do. He is your Surety, your Mediator, your Substitute, your Redeemer. He atoned for your sins on the cross.