I was an Arminian for 10 years and never was taught anything about Calvinism, however I saw many scriptures that seemed to teach that God was choosing His own people. I was confused coming from a FREE WILL background. So when God saw fit for me to have 5 shoulder surgeries, I finally had the opportunity to study those verses that showed God as being the decider on who He saves.I prayed, read about the reformation , listened to debates and explanations of the reformed understanding and then God convinced me that it was the truth and I left my former church and now go to a reformed Baptist church.When God finally showed me the truth, I felt born again, again.
@@mr.f6912 Maybe you can help save me from it. Would you mind answering some questions for me that I can’t seem to fit into the Calvinist paradigm? John 12:39 ¶ Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. Why did God have to supernaturally prevent these people from believing if they were incapable of doing so in the first place? My understanding of Calvinism is that men are naturally totally depraved and incapable of believing. That faith has to be given to them in order to believe. John says that God had to harden them so that they wouldn’t. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks.
@@evanu6579 The verse says it was to fulfill the prophesy from Isaiah. Many believed Jesus was the Messiah because he was performing great miracles but many Jews and even the Apostles didn’t understand at the time of his earthly ministry what all that entailed. They thought the Messiah was going to save them in the way Moses saved them from Egypt and rule as King David once did. Jesus even rebukes Peter in Matthew 16:23 because Peter didn’t fully understand what Jesus was sent to accomplish on the cross. Even up to the soldiers coming to arrest Jesus Peter tries to fight the soldiers by slashing off one of their ears, but Jesus tells him to stand down. This shows that even the Apostles didn’t fully understand Gods plan for salvation at the time. So everything being done was to accomplish God’s will and plan for salvation because if the Pharisees believed he was the Messiah they would never have had him crucified and they would crown him as king. 14 After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself. John 6:14-15 | NIV These Jews believed in Jesus and were about to make him king by force but later in the chapter many of them stop believing. Jesus doesn’t want them to crown him as king because he hasn’t yet finished his earthly ministry and he did not come to be king in the way they understood it. God is doing the same thing to the Jews in John 12:39 that he did to Pharaoh. Also notice how in John 12:42 many of the leaders did believe but they wouldn’t openly acknowledge it because they feared man more than God. So they had faith but not saving faith. 42 Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not openly acknowledge their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved human praise more than praise from God. John 12:42-43 | NIV
@@Ephesians-rz7zp Sounds like you’re saying that they couldn’t see the kingdom. So no one was born of the Spirit at that time? I would agree. I didn’t see anywhere in your answer how God hardened their heart to prevent them from believing lest He should heal them. Seems like you’re in agreement with the point I was making with the passage. They could have believed in their natural state to the point of salvation but God had to supernaturally prevent them. You just expanded it to more people.
Read the historical sources where the beliefs of Calvinism came from. No, they didn't come from Bible interpretation, they are read "onto" the Bible. Its a repeat of Augustinianism, which itself is a repeat of Gnostic, Greek/Roman Stoic and Manichaeist ideas interjected in Christianity. We have the historical documents and anybody with a will can learn how the Church became infected with these ideas. Take the Red pill.
Gregg clearly states that salvation *is* in view in Romans 9, as it's a benefit of being in Christ. White continues to accuse Gregg of claiming it's not about salvation. Does he even listen?
I know, right? I just listened to that part. I was impressed by Steve's explanation of Romans 9, and surprised (though, I shouldn't be at this point) that James completely strawmans his position.
James White is a very good speaker and he can influence many people to Calvinism. The Arminian side to follow the bible is supported many times in differents books in the bible, we have to change our attitudes and following the teachings that has been given to us, even if we have recieve grace.
I find it funny that James White accuses Steve Gregg of eisegeting the Bible when he's simply using scripture to interpret scripture, whereas James White is constantly eisegeting Calvinism into the scripture throughout all of these debates.
I'm sorry but thats simply not true , I read the bible from cover to cover in context at the least 4 times. And everytime I read it its nearly impossible for me to see that man has a completely free will and are salvation works with God rather then him completely saving us. And I'm not a calvinest lol but I certainly can't disagree with one eather the bible is clear
I am in the same boat as you. I dont consider myself a calvinist. I however don’t disagree with any of their doctrines 🤫 I used to hold a feeling of resentment towards the view of calvinism, that was until GOD granted me the ability to come to true faith and repentance that i understood it to be true. I do however disagree with most calvinists on what seems to be their preferred belief on eschatology. Ive found many if them to hold to the postmillennial and some to the a-millennial view.
@@AreJay_ that's interesting because me myself am a postmillennial lol thing was I believed revelations haven't came to pass just 2 years ago (premillennial). I switched after reading the scriptures that say Jesus returns after his enemies are his footstool. And then ofcourse there's just basic history how the roman empire was called Babylon and nero who's name in greek is 666 persecuted the church for 42 months , which is spot on with the scriptures. There's much more but it takes research to find.
@@AreJay_ I know atheist who say the Calvinist view is the correct view. If they were gonna be Christians they would be Calvinist. That’s a non bias opinion with no dog in the fight
Here is absolute Biblical proof that God does NOT cause or determine everything; In Jeremiah 19:5 God says, “They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal-something I did NOT COMMAND or mention, nor did it enter my mind.” 2nd Peter 3:9 says, “The Lord is…not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance.” and yet, it also has Jesus saying, "Broad is the road that leads to destruction (hell) and many are on it, but straight and narrow is the road that leads to life (Heaven) and few ever find it." So, as a Calvinist, do you really believe that God arbitrarily creates some people for one reason; to burn for eternity in hell?
Jer. 19:5 indeed says “I did not command” meaning God did not tell or speak to the Israelites to sacrifice to Baal. This doesn’t mean God did not determine these things to come to pass, as “command” does not equal determine - it means He did not tell his people to do those things (they sinned greatly.) if you were to believe God didn’t determine it to come to pass, how would you reconcile that notion with Heb 1:3 which says God upholds all things by the word of his power? Also Col 1:17 that in Him (Jesus) all things hold together?
1. You said “The scriptures said Christ died for all the calvinist says no”. Precise theological thinking is a good thing. We are called to be students of the Word (2 Timothy 2:15). But on this point, it seems that most people follow a theological system to get to their answer, rather than the clear Word of God. If it were not for theological systems (namely, Calvinism and Arminianism), the question of whom Jesus died for would probably never come up-but it has come up! One side says that, if Christ did not die for all, then there can be no genuine offer of salvation. The other side says that, if Christ died for some who will never be saved, then His death in some sense fails to accomplish its purpose. Either way, there seems to be an attack upon God’s character or Christ’s work-either God’s love is limited or Jesus’ power is limited. This presents an unnecessary dilemma and creates a tension where none need exist. We know that God’s love is infinite (Psalm 107:1) and that Christ’s power is infinite (Colossians 1:16-17). The dilemma is a false one of our own making. In short, the offer of salvation is universal-to all who will believe (Romans 10:11, 13). We also know that, regardless of how broad Christ’s atonement is, it is limited in some respect-it is effective only for those who believe (John 3:18). John 10 provides more insight into the issue of whom Jesus died for. In that passage we see that Christ died for His sheep (John 10:11, 15). Also, all who are His sheep will come to Him (verses 4 and 27), and they are kept secure in Christ (verses 28-30). However, when we share the gospel, we don’t try to “pre-screen” the hearers of the message. We don’t delve into who are the elect or for whom Jesus may or may not have died. Those discussions would distract from the goal of evangelism. When presenting the gospel, we simply say, “Jesus died for your sin, and He rose again from the dead. His death is sufficient to pay for your sins if you will put your faith in Him.” This is a biblically accurate statement, and it avoids trying to get too specific. The preaching of the apostles in the New Testament doesn’t try to cut it more finely than that. 2. You said “ The scriptures say it pleased God to save those who believe the calvinist says He causes belief in them that He saves” God is talking here not John Calvin, Ezekiel 36:25-26 25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. 26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. Why didn’t God ask them to change their heart? Why is God making them walk in his statutes without their will, did he consult Calvin? He is forcing them to keep his judgements and do them. John Calvin was nowhere around. 3. You said “The scriptures say Jacob was chosen for service The Calvinist says Jacob was chosen for salvation and Esau for reprobation” When I read this scripture Paul (Inspired by the holy spirit) is giving examples of God’s decision making process, he brings up Jacob and Esau moves on to Pharaoh and then on to clay vessels, seems like the point being made is about God’s Sovereignty and not about servitude. Romans 22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory- 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he says in Hosea: “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people; and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”[i] I did not see Calvinism anywhere in the scripture, but I did read where Jesus said “37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” You said everyone who thinks that way was inspired by Calvin, was Jesus inspired by Calvin?
Bogus conclusion. If someone fails to accept a gift that doesn't change the gift in any way other than to whom the gift belongs. The gift is 100% effectual, but you have to turn the power on.😉
@@JamesBrown-fd1nv where did you read because anything you say should come from scripture where did you read that we have to turn it on, where did you read? It is something that we do that gets us saved
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". . .
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19
Part of me loves Steve G. He, unlike many who have debated Dr. White, respectfully calls White, “DR. White” and I respect that. Catholic Ass-hats like Sungenis & some Muslims call him, “Jim” during debates. All that aside he’s a clear thinker and would wipe my butt in a debate, however, White dismantled him in almost every respect. He also shows HIS respect by listening to 12+ hrs of Greg’s materials and never mis-representing his opponent’s’ positions. I think Steve is honest, but I also truly believe he is Wrong! Nonetheless he is a brother in Christ, and I know Dr.White would want me to think of him as such!!
Again Mr Gregg making an assumption that all Calvinist have become Calvinist, because they were taught that way the way I was taught was through scripture and the Holy Spirit, illuminating the Scriptures to me. It wasn’t taught to me by a man , it was revealed to me by the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit through the word of God, as I being a Arminian at the time! It was the Holy Spirit that had me become a Calvinist when I was a Arminianist
lol. Listening to Steve is like listening to a cry baby say it’s all love love love 😂. His exegesis is excruciatingly awful. How Steve became a teacher is beyond me. Goes to show you can do anything even if it means being super emotional and running with emotions instead of reason 😂
Not a single text James White uses proves conclusively and effectually forces people to be saved. He has to focus on a couple of specific verses to try to prove his point. But the Bible cover to cover from Genesis 1:28 and 29 and on clearly denotes God having chosen to create a world where libertarianism exists. In fact evening Genesis 1:26 libertarianism is inferred when God says, "Let us make man in our likeness".
@kylestaack38 neither are ate words rapture or Trihune God found in Scripture, but we use them to describe a concept. -'Free will' given to man begining with Genesis 1 is found cover to cover in the Bible when one reads the Bible for what it says, and not blinded with Calivimstic lenses.
@kylestaack38 Thank you for the confirmation verse of God's mercy in having provided a means of Salvation to all who in repentace turn to the cross of Christ and His finished Atoning work on the cross as their only means of Salvation. God didn't have to extend it to wicked sinners, but He did.
Free will went out with the fall and the curse adam . We are Free to make choices but since the fall everyone is dead in trespasses and sins . Will and choices are not the same. Free will is a heresy by Satan. Show me one verse where it says we have Free will or our will is free? 43Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. 44No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. (John:6.43-44)
The beautiful thing is that God directly interacts with us. Did you sot down with a bible and say hummm i reason this too be true therefore i believe? I know from my personal experience that i was convicted almost like a massive judgement came and grace all at the same time. I did not choose too believe God chose too make me believe. He did so in Grand fashion in my experience. It was sudden and massive and ripped my then life apart but i still had his peace then he rebuilt my life much much greater than i could. God is great and none of us deserve anything except danmation nothing we do can give us salvation or even earn a step towards it. It is he and he alone.
I've seen a lot of Dr white. I must come to the conclusion that he is either deeply deceived or a deceiver. I've looked into it deeply, Augustine was the first to bring the idea of the Elect as Calvinists know it. I don't believe he can be convinced, or is even capable of entertaining a non-calvinist view without the grace of God.
He has the grace of God just as much as any of us do, yet he's continually suppressed the truth for so long, I don't think he hear anymore. And that very well may be a judgement against him at this point...
Calvinism is true-when I understood each doctrine I felt saved and born all over again. I saw my inconsistencies as a “free-will” believing Christian. It’s just not true. God is the author and finisher of our faith. People reject these truths because they want to share in God’s glory in their salvation. No one chose Christ, He chose them. Period!
born again all over... Sounds like a possession of gnosticism. All sub cults the leech off the body of Christ give that feeling. If you can say Calvinism is the truth after hearing the arguments Steve made, it's out of my hands. I hope God leads you to serve his purpose for you.
Amen . Ther are no contradictions in the word and we shouldn't believe in them ether. Free will is a heresy crept in by Satan. Words free will are not in the word of God. Were Free to make choices .
I have to say again, Mr. Greg stated there’s nowhere in scripture that states Esau was rejected even though he wanted to repent to be saved. I don’t think he’s ever read Hebrews 12. 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright. 17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears!
Again, Mr. Greg is trying to say that the potters the two vessels is two sections of Israel that all Paul’s talking about is Israel in Romans 9 , I think he needs to read at the end, 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, It says right here even US who is Paul’s referring to is he not talking to the Gentile church? Whom he has called not only all the Jews, but also of the Gentiles, so there goes his theory out the window. It wasn’t two lumps of Israel, separated as he’s trying to say.😮 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles
This debate is about God’s freedom and synergists limit that freedom by a completely unbiblical, illogical and absurd elevation of man’s autonomy. Why is it so hard for people to just accept that “free will” is not autonomous free will. Free will is the ability to freely choose what is in line with your nature, what you desire most and apart from God, no man chooses God? Why is that so hard to grasp when it is plastered all over scripture? Why is it so hard to understand that God ordains all that comes to pass and accomplishes those decrees by using the free choices of men? Biblical free will, not philosophical, humanistic and pagan versions of it. It always amazes me that even Christians desire so much to elevate their “autonomy” to heretical levels
It strikes me that James White never engages with Steve Gregg's actual points. If I made a flow chart of this debate, it would be James starting a whole ton of points, Steve responding to them, James making new points, Steve responding to them, and so on. In many cases, Steve makes his own points completely unanswered by James. It's a bit ridiculous, but not too surprising. Defenders of Calvinism tend to repeat their proof texts with little argument ad nauseum, but never respond to other explanations for them or explain passages that go against them.
Geez just listened to part 4 where Steve tried to ask Dr White some questions, which he didn’t really like. I see why he likes debates with a lot of rules he thinks it’s a chess game to try to dominate the other opponent. He not only wouldn’t answer his questions (because they are against his view) he accused Steve of things he’s (JW) clearly guilty of.
God's sovereignty is seen very early, such as Clemens Romanus. A.D. 69, Epist. ad Corinth. 1:pgs. 64, 20, 30, 72, 78, 88, 114, 130 ... as well as Barnabas. A.D. 70, Barnab. Ep. Far. 1, sect. 11. p. 224, par. 1, c. 6, p. 227, Part 1, s. 6, p. 224.
@Evan. I think that is misunderstood.. There wasn't a systematic view until Augustine. Probably because Christians were being murdered for the first two centuries that kind of stuff makes scholarly academic approaches somewhat difficult
It's not about God's sovereignty. Calvinists don't use the word right. God has sovereignly inspired scripture. Calvinists try to take away God's sovereignty by changing His Word.
@@coryalbright9798🤣🤣🤣🤣. The people trying to hold to the original text in the original language are the ones changing definitions. Calvinist don't change change their view of sovereignty from one page to the next simply because our ego or feelings are hurt. God is sovereign to flood the entire world as equal as he is sovereign to call dead people to life without their belief being a prerequisite.
To think that we’re all just a bunch of robots wondering around hoping and praying that our name was thrown into the “saved” cookie jar instead of the “damned” jar at the beginning of the world is just hard to believe!
Jesus' Word lol..... I sure do. I trust what the Bible says. I CHOOSE this day to serve the Lord. It’s sad to see people actually following a regular man instead of God. John Calvin is not gonna save anyone!! Sending my prayers!!!
I just need to add (I know I already commented here), but I noticed that parts 4 and 5 have the comments turned off. There are some folks on here who think that Dr. White was being harsh to Mr. Gregg. What you don’t seem to understand is that Mr. Gregg was using some very nasty debate tactics here, asking a question, letting Dr. White speak for all of a second or two, and then interrupted with more assertions and questions. Dr. White very precisely pointed out the loaded nature of Mr. Gregg’s questions, and so Dr. White is under no obligation to answer questions based on faulty premises or asked with some bad faith motives. Mr. Gregg claimed that Dr. White’s questions were loaded as well, but did anyone notice that Dr. White did not interrupt Mr. Gregg? Dr. White asked his questions during his presentations and Mr. Gregg barely touched them. If you can hear that interaction and think that Dr. White was in the wrong for his reaction then you need to re-assess how you view discussions/debate. Imagine having a friendly disagreement with someone (because up until that point the two men were fairly cordial and kind), and then the person you are talking to asks you questions. Then right as you get a few words into answering the question they butt in with “Well, what about this or that?” And then you try to answer and then “Oh but you are then saying this which isn’t true and” then you try to clarify and then “See everyone, he is reading into this text something that isn’t there.” All without giving you the courtesy of putting out more than a sentence or two before they rush in and thrust the sword once again. My word, it seems like you guys don’t realize that most significant truths and thoughts take more than a quick 140 character snippet to answer… Edit: And one last point to add - Mr. Gregg’s lack of theological education of any kind is very telling. Does Mr. Gregg regularly attend a church where the word of God is preached, exposited, taught, every week? It doesn’t even have to be a Calvinistic church. The way he makes certain statements, like “Oh, well Paul COULD be talking about all men being depraved based on Romans 1, but we don’t know. He doesn’t say, so we should lay that side,” just shows a fundamental ignorance of these things. He makes a lot of such statements, giving a “Well, we don’t know for sure that this is what was said or meant,” and then concludes that it CAN’T be that. That is not how serious theology is done.
Christ does give us freedom, undisputable. However what we do not realize if we backslide then we are not exercizing free will but putting ourselves under satans will that is ultimately under Gods will. So we see then that God is the only one with frre will. We just have a choice to make day by day. Maybe i am right or maybe I am wrong.
We are volitional creatures. God has given us minds and hearts, and He's given us wills. And we exercise that will all the time. We make choices every minute of the day, and we choose what we want. We choose freely. Nobody's coercing us, putting a gun to our head-we're not robots. Robots don't have minds. Robots don't have wills. Robots don't have hearts. We're human beings. We make choices. That's why we're in trouble with God because the choices that we make in our fallen condition are sinful choices. We choose according to our desires which are only wicked continuously the Bible tells us. That we are as it were, dead in sin and trespasses even though biologically we're very much alive, and we're walking according to the course of this world-according to the Prince of the power of the air-fulfilling the lusts of the flesh is what the Bible tells us. And so, the Bible makes it very clear that we are actively involved in making choices for which we are responsible, and which expose us to the judgment of God. And yet at the same time, the Bible teaches us that we're enslaved." We are not free from ourselves. We're not free from our own sinful inclinations, and our sinful appetites, and our sinful desires. We're slaves to our sinful impulses. That's what the Bible teaches us again, and again, and again. The humanist doctrine of free will, the pagan view of free will says that man is free not only from coercion, but man is free in the sense that his will is indifferent. It has no predisposition, or inclination, bias, or bent towards sin because the pagan and the humanist deny the radical character of the fall. But the Bible teaches us that we are fallen creatures who still choose and make decisions, but we make them in the context of our prison of sin. And the only way we can get out of that prison is if God sets us free.
James White accuses Steve Gregg of reading into the text.......Jesus said - No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:44, KJV) James White interprets this as 'No man can come to me except the Father draws him and the Father will only draw the elect and no one else. Even though Jesus said - And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. (John 12:32, KJV) So James White is the one reading into the text and using eisegesis, but to him it's ok as long as he's the one doing it. It's also really funny to listen to JW actually brag that an atheist agrees with his view on the bible like it's some great achievment.
So you are an universalist then? Because John 6:44 also says “and I will raise him up at the last day.” (KJV) All whom the father draws are saved. James White is not reading into the text, it’s obviously the elect that are in view here (elect = the ones that are saved).
@@stuestolen It doesn't say everyone the Father draws will come to him it just says no one can come without the Father drawing them. And Jesus said when He was lifted up He would draw all men. Of course Calvinsts will say that can't mean all because - calvinism. But all means all. People have free will and the ability to choose. I know Calvinists don't believe that but the Bible does - 'But as many as RECEIVED Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who BELIEVE in His name, (John 1:12, NASB) 'For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; (2 Corinthians 5:14, NASB)
@@keith3362 1) John 6 teaches that all whom the fathers draws will come. You are wrong in asserting that people can be drawn by God, but not come (in the context of John 6). First of all, the words “draw” and “give” are used as parallel expressions in John 6. John 6:65 reads: “And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were GIVEN unto him of my Father.” This points back to what Jesus said in verse 44, where the word “draw” is used, instead of “give”: “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me DRAW him: and I will raise him up at the last day”. And as we see here, all whom are drawn, will be saved (raised on the last day). If this wasn’t enough, Jesus also says explicitly in verse 37 that “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.”. This passage clearly teaches that all whom the Father gives/draws, will come. If you still think this is a mistaken interpretation, please explain why. I don’t understand how you could interpret it in any other way. 2) What does draw mean? I think you are assuming a wrong meaning for the word “draw” in your interpretation. When we see how this Greek word is use other places in the bible, we understand that we’re not talking about mere influencing or inviting people to come. The same term is used to describe when people are dragged out of a place, dragged to a place or dragged to court (Acts 16:19; 21:30; James 2:6). The meaning of this word therefore doesn’t fit well with an arminian interpretation. This of course makes sense in light of the biblical teaching of total depravity, that we are all in rebellion against God, and that no one seeks God in their natural state. That’s why God have to draw them, before they can come. 3) “But all means all” When you say “all” means “all”, I assume you mean that the word “all” always refers to every single individual person. The only way to uphold this understanding is to be a universalist. How do you interpret the word “all” in these verses: 1.Corintians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” Will every single individual person be made alive with Christ? Or what about the verse you cited yourself: 2.Corinitans 5:14. Did every single individual person on earth die with Christ? All in these verses obviously refer to the believers, not everyone without exception. So, when Jesus says that he will draw all to himself, it cannot mean every single individual person, except if you interpret this as universalism. 4) John 1:12-13 Yes, every person who believes and receives Jesus, will be saved as John 1:12 says. But read verse 13 as well. It’s not because of their own will, but of Gods will. That’s also why it says that they were predestined to be his children (Ephesians 1:5). They were predestined to receive and believe. Calvinists does believe that people have the ability to choose, but in our natural state we all chose sin instead of God. That’s why God first needs to draw us, before we can come. God makes the unwilling, willing. He gives us a new heart and a will, so we can choose him. Philippian’s 2:13 “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”
In part 4, James White suddenly claims we must let all scripture speak together and never isolate a passage, and that he would never ask anyone else to do that. Rewind to the discussion of John 6 and we see that's a giant load of crap. "Rules for thee, but not for me."
So Mr. Greg seems to believe that God’s will is not always done. Has he ever read Isaiah 10:46? 9 Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. 10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.
The primary problem I have with Calvinist, especially ones like James White, is this absolute belief they know everything about God and his plan of salvation. They refuse to offer any form of humility to say that they could be wrong about what they believe. The arrogance is asstonishing. It's almost narcissistic. They actually believe they have God all figured out.
@@Michael-uk3pj John 17:6 ¶ I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: 👉🏻thine they were👈🏻, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. Steve says that the Father gave Jesus those that already belonged to Him. The faithful remnant were given to the Messiah they waited for. The rest were hardened..... John 12:39 ¶ Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. And since Jesus came unto His own (only to the lost sheep of Israel) and wasn’t opening the kingdom up to the Gentiles until 3.5 years after His resurrection, then no man could come. Gentiles not yet allowed and Israel hardened. Only the faithful remnant of Israel who had learned from God’s teaching would come to Jesus. So Steve just understands what was taking place at that time.
We are all deserved of danmation. That would be just. Saving the elect is grace. God is just and gracious he demonstrates all these attributes perfectly.
Again, Mr. Greg states that God doesn’t control the universe and his sovereign control. Why does he not believe this one scripture teaches differently! Daniel 4:35 All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?”
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". :)
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19 .
Dr. White was the only one, up to this point at least (and given the pattern I have no reason to believe this will change in parts 4 or 5) that actually took a text and walked through the text verse by verse. He didn’t have to jump around to various other passages with different contexts and subject matters to read into the text at issue. Dr. White could walk through each text they were discussing, whether it was John 6, Eph. 1, or Rom. 9, from start to finish. Mr. Gregg could not (and did not up to this point) do that. The main issue with Mr. Gregg’s theology, as made very clear in Part 4 of this discussion, is that his anthropology is far too high. He refuses to allow the entire testimony of Scripture speak about the absolute fallen nature of man, from birth, haters of God and slaves of sin. Mr. Gregg puts man on a higher pedestal than he should, and as a result he puts God’s sovereignty on a lower pedestal to compensate.
How do you read these scriptures? John 10:28 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. John 6:37-39 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Are you looking for verse that says that letter for letter? There is none. But plenty of verses that imply your choice to believe or not to believe. How did you believe in Christ? Just it happened or you decided to believe?
@@SavedbyGrace-js8iz it just happened The Father was drawing me to Christ through the Holy Spirit convicts me of my sin granted me repentance and saving faith in Christ as I heard the gospel made me born again
CAlvinism is easily debunked with the simple fact that you can't have genuine love without freewill. That's common sense. Everything else stems from this point. Love is the highest moral good. The bible says the greatest commandment is to love God then others. Calvinists, from my pov, see true love as a weakness.
Me and most of my "calvinist" friends only became that way after we read through the Bible beginning to end without jumping around.. Up til then I'd been anti Calvin.. And my experience is my friends experienced the same thing.
I wonder, if as a father, Steve, has any inclination to reject or deny any of his children when they displease him. I would doubt it though. Therefore, he seems to teach that he's a better lover of children than God is.
Gregg believes his faith saves him. Faith he believes comes before regeneration, from a natural, once born man. Nicodemus was instructed in John 3:3,7 that being born again by the will and grace of God alone as the ONLY means of being in the Way, the Truth, and the Life. The Lords Sheep will hear and be regenerated by the power of God through and BY the faith and works OF Jesus Christ. Faith is a work, a work of God by Christ for His Sheep.
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:40, KJV) Seems like ‘believing on Him’ (Jesus who paid the price we couldn’t ) is it. He said every one which believes on Him, period. He didn’t say who I regenerate or make them believe in me. Faith is not counted as a work in salvation any more than accepting a million dollars from a person who gives it to you would be. You didn’t do anything to deserve it.
@@keith3362 There's only one way you "see" Him. John 3:3,6-8 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot 👉see 👈the kingdom of God. [6] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. [7] Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. [8] The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
@@keith3362 2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway 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:👈
Maybe you should look. He has verse-by-verse teaching through the whole Bible, and it is excellent. Though, most non-Calvinists don’t feel the need to do sermons on their position because it’s not anything unique. It’s how everyone reads scripture unless they’ve been taught read into texts Calvinism by a Calvinist. It’s not very complicated.
Im not better by having faith i am better off and yes the good works are better because once in Christ they are no longer filthy rags and actually we get a crown of life for it which we give right back to Jesus and bow before him but we are better yes than our atheist neighbor because we submit we are humble and fear God that is better than being proud and not fearing God of course it is better and why does the bible talk about Good and evil men in Proverbs if there is no such thing and we are all equally evil as Total depravity demands but is NOT biblical
When the calvinist says the unbeliever is totally depraved they really mean he's singularly depraved. There's only one thing the calvinist believes the totally depraved man can't do - believe in Jesus. They won't admit this but it's true. A totally depraved man can be charitable, self sacrificial and kind...he just can't believe. Total depravity is unbiblical.
Even if Steve’s misunderstanding of nations were true: God STILL prepared one **beforehand for destruction** . He still hasn’t proven his point. God still had the sovereign right to create a group for destruction. Well, wait…what about their “free will”?
Even though God only had a remnant that believed in Messiah under Old Covenant Israel, He still went forward and created the nation, knowing they were headed for destruction (70AD) for their unbelief. God used their failure to bring salvation, and a warning, to the Gentiles. If, at any time, they should choose to believe in Jesus, they will be grafted back in to God's Israel. The election is always upon a Jew, but they must believe. Romans 11:20-23 KJV Well; *_because of unbelief they were broken off,_* ... [21] For *_if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee._* [22] *_Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God:_* on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. [23] And *_they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in:_* for God is able to graff them in again.
Clemmens is not a Calvinist James White you are deluded Read his actual works Elect saying the word elect just makes you a bible believer God does Choose people the word elect just means CHOSEN and God chose people and the choosing sometimes usually actually has nothing to do with Justification
I agree alot of calvinist have become calvinist because they have been trained to be calvinist,this is true growing up young in the faith trained to be reformed I only saw the bible one way never seeking to understand through the spirit,Spirit, theology always felt wrong and made me question if I was even chosen,sooner or later left it behind and learned more about the bible then I ever did under a reformed teacher,calvinisms trash heresy
@@GThePreacher No you were mocking the bible. I let the bible speak for itself, I don't follow my own heart and human philosophy. "Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began," 2 Timothy 1:8-9 Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” John 3:4-8
23:50 Dr. White gives a false interpretation of vessels of wrath fit for destruction: Even though God only had a remnant that had faith in the coming Messiah's work on their behalf (through the shadows of Christ provided to Israel under the Law), He still went forward and created the nation, knowing that through THEIR own unbelief, they were destined to destruction (70AD). God used THEIR failure to bring salvation, and a warning, to the Gentiles. If, at any time, THEY should choose to believe in Jesus, they will be grafted back in to God's Israel, but THEY must choose to believe (otherwise the door to election and salvation would have been closed permanently, along with the hardening and blinding from God). Romans 11:20-23 KJV Well; *_because of unbelief they were broken off,_* ... [21] For *_if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee._* [22] *_Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God:_* on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. [23] And *_they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in:_* for God is able to graff them in again.
In Romans 9, Paul deals with the sovereignty of God in election, picturing God as a potter working with clay: “Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory?” (Romans 9:21-23). The vessels of wrath are contrasted with the vessels of mercy; one set is slated for destruction, and the other for glory. Let’s take a quick review of the letter to the Romans: Paul highlights the need everyone has for God’s righteousness (Romans 1-3) and how God provided for humanity to have that righteousness by His grace through faith in Jesus Christ. This gift is available because of Jesus’ sacrifice at the cross (Romans 3-4). In Romans, Paul also describes the results for everyone who has received God’s grace (Romans 5-8) and provides evidence of God’s trustworthiness in how He provides salvation to Jews and Gentiles (Romans 9-11). Paul concludes his letter by outlining the responsibilities of believers to live righteously (Romans 12-16). In Romans 9:22 Paul mentions vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, reminding his readers that the story doesn’t end happily for everyone. Even as he is challenging his readers to trust in God, Paul laments the fact that many of his fellow countrymen (Israelites) were unbelieving (Romans 9:1-5). Paul explains, however, that this sad state of affairs was not a failure of God or His Word (Romans 9:6). God had promised that Abraham’s descendants would be blessed but had chosen Abraham’s line through Isaac and then Jacob (Romans 9:7-13). Not everyone who would come from Abraham would be blessed through that specific promise. God had certainly promised blessing for all the families of the earth through Abraham’s specific descendant (Genesis 12:3b)-Jesus Christ-but the promises pertaining to a great and blessed nation would be for the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The question is whether God has the right to choose whom He will bless and how. If God is sovereign, then we should trust Him as the One who knows how to deliver us. But Paul introduces the idea in Romans 9:22 that there are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Not everyone will trust in Him, apparently. If God has the right to choose who will be blessed and how, then some might question whether God is unjust by not ensuring the same outcome for everyone. Paul addresses this question in Romans 9:14-18, explaining that God has the right (as the Creator) to have mercy on whom He will have mercy and the right to harden whom He will harden (Romans 9:18). Paul cites God’s dealings with Pharaoh in Exodus as an example. Paul then anticipates the question of how God can hold people accountable if, ultimately, He is making these kinds of choices (Romans 9:19). Rather than answer directly, Paul appeals to God’s sovereignty as the Creator and the owner of what He has created (Romans 9:20-21). Pottery doesn’t question the right of the potter to fashion it in a particular way. The potter has the right to fashion from the clay whatever he wants. Paul elaborates by asking a series of questions: what if God-who has the power to judge and exert His authority-was patient with vessels of wrath prepared for destruction (Romans 9:22)? Does God have the right to be patient? Or is He restricted in His ability to show mercy and patience? Clearly, God has that right with no restrictions. Some have wrestled with Paul’s statement that there are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Some have even concluded that he is teaching a doctrine often called double election-that God chooses who will not be saved in the same way He chooses who will be saved. But, like Paul said in 1 Corinthians 4:6, we should not go beyond what is written. We need to be careful about making inferences when a verse is not explicit. In the case of the vessels of wrath, Paul raises a hypothetical-a “what if”-to remind readers that God has the right to make such choices if He so desires. But Paul stops short of asserting that God is making such choices. Paul’s point is that God has the right to have mercy on whom He chooses and harden whom He chooses (Romans 9:18), but that is different from asserting that God chooses some not to be saved. Paul isn’t addressing that question; he is making a point about God’s sovereign authority. Thus, if someone is not receiving a blessing because God didn’t promise him that blessing, neither God nor His Word has failed. If He is indeed the Creator, He has the right to bless whom He will, and He has the right to harden whom He will. If He is the Potter, how He deals with vessels of wrath prepared for destruction is His prerogative.
@@kedrickgarland5343 the problem with your take is that Paul is clearly speaking to Jews and their believes surrounding Israel and the promises of the covenant - to read it instead as wholly a sermon on the doctrine salvation is to misread it entirely.
@@dankmartin6510 He is Cleary speaking to , but it is about salvation and be being born again and Jesus said other sheep I have that he must bring into the fold, to get into the fold you must be born again of his spirit. All of the new covenant is for the Jews, the Gentiles never had the old, how can they have a new. We were grafted in, how is that done?
@@kedrickgarland5343 Roman's 9 is addressing angry Jews who thought salvation was for them alone and Paul explained that they have no right to complain - trying to stretch that out into a 'doctrine' is misusing the text for presuppositions.
Jesus 💯 did what the Father commanded. John 12 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
Ultimately, you can’t prove either position because you are not God. The resultant being (Us) exists on a different level than the Creator. What you can do as a responsible parent is use your own heart to decide the likelihood of God foreordaining every crime in the ghastly history of mankind, versus these tragedies being a result of God giving man a genuine portion of responsibility. Seemingly God would have the ability to create semi autonomous beings. If God is like the best parents on earth we could imagine, who are peace loving global citizens, would He be comfortable with his children being lost for eternity? Here we find the meaning of semi autonomous. Perhaps interdependent is a better description, or limited freewill. Calvinism does not make any sense from the perspective of parental heart or stack up to scripture that describes one man’s experience with the audible voice of God. Note these words given to Jeremiah: “They have turned their backs on me, not their faces; and although I taught them, taught them frequently, they have not listened so as to receive instruction. Instead they put their detestable idols in the house that bears my name, to defile it; and they built the high places for Ba‘al which are in the Ben-Hinnom Valley, to burn alive their sons and daughters to Molekh - something I did not order them to do, it never even entered my mind that they would do such an abominable thing - and thus they caused Y’hudah to sin.’ ~ Jeremiah Notice what YAHOVAH God says: “something I did not order them to do, it never even entered my mind that they would do such an abominable thing.” It is more important to encounter God than to walk with theology. Or Jude 1:6-7 “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority ‘they didn’t keep their proper positions of authority, they didn’t keep it, it wasn’t God who ordered them to abandon their positions of authority’ but abandoned their proper dwelling-these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.” What I’m trying to get across is the significance of the portion of responsibility God gave to man. Did God want man to fall? No. Then why couldn’t God get what He wants? There are a few significant reasons, because Adam and Eve had to trust His instructions, in order to fulfill their portion of responsibility on their way to maturity. In the long run God gets what He wants because we simply cannot experience true joy and happiness for eternity without aligning to His eternal perspective, but we can prolong this conclusion through our own ignorance, pride or recalcitrance.
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". .
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. -Acts 3:19 .
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee. In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased. But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help. This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit. This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.". :)
Part 3 and Steve finally gives a ‘brief’ positive case for his position… Then defaults once again to trying to poke holes in predestination. Armenian perspective is obviously biblically incorrect.
I fail to see how your conclusion follows from your premise, or how your premise is even sound. If someone is against a view that makes positive claims, is it so surprising that he argues against those claims? And, if he does so, does he not prove the opposite view in many cases? If I make a case showing limited atonement is not true, I have proven that unlimited atonement is true. Likewise, if I show that election is not unconditional, I have shown that it is conditional. If I make a case that total depravity is not true, I have proven my view regarding the nature of man. Insofar as these topics come up, he attempts to do all of these things. You can debate his arguments, but pretending like he doesn't make them is not helpful to anyone.
@@lordblarg He never proves the other side wrong, just attempts to punch holes in the argument; all the while poorly giving a defense of his position. Yet he's bent on his position, no matter what the scripture plainly states, example .. Rom 11 says, God is not done with the children of Israel; Steve says He is.
@@LifeandLifeMoreAbundantly, I'm not following you. I understood your first post as saying, "Steve is wrong because he attempts to refute another view rather than support his own." Did I misunderstand your first post?
@@lordblarg He’s not proving his position by trying to deconstruct the other side, as you suggest. And he has no solid arguments to defend his positions. Thus his goal is to try and discredit the other perspective, cast doubt; ‘Did God really say all Israel would be saved..or does that verse mean something else..?’.
@@LifeandLifeMoreAbundantly, "He’s not proving his position by trying to deconstruct the other side[.]" - Proving a position by deconstructing the other side is a perfectly valid way to prove one's position given the debate is over a binary. I don't understand how he didn't do this. I also don't understand one time where he tried to "cast doubt" rather than giving an alternative interpretation. He gave an alternative interpretation for John 6, Ephesians 1, Romans 1, Romans 8-9, Acts 13, etc... You can say you don't agree with his interpretation, but, again, to pretend like he didn't give one is not helpful to anyone, most importantly you.
Faith is not sufficient to save according to James White which is heresy Paul always says faith alone is the only way to be justified and draw near back to God and God will draw near to you that is a promise of God that faith will save you even a very small amount by the skin of our teeth some with no good works like the thief on the cross still justified without any sanctification because he had no time to grow in good works and that is ok in terms of destiny but not rewards is all Faith is so important but irrelevant to TULIP because it is grace alone by Grace alone LOL that is not biblical we are in a relationship w god 2 people not God loving himself like the Trinity God is not lonely but he does WANT and LOVE us
Calvinism does in fact believe in grace alone through faith alone. You don't understand calvinism or White if that's what you think. We believe that our faith is perfected by our works, as James 1 says, and that faith without works go nowhere (or is dead as James 1 also says).
You clearly don't understand Of course we are saved by faith but faith is a gift of God Eph 2 8-10 It is God who grants repentance Acts 5:31 & 2 Timothy 2:25...
@@Michael-uk3pj Calvinism claims that you’re saved to have faith. Faith isn’t the means of your salvation but the result. It’s grace that gives you access to faith. The bible says the opposite though.
The difference is epistemology. Arminians like Steve start with man when it comes to their theology. That's why they are championing the "free will" of man rather than the sovereignty of God. Calvinists start with God, hence, we champion His will over our will as revealed in the Scriptures.
Calvinism is merely a repeat of Augustinian Gnosticism, Stoic and Manichaeist teaching which the early church fathers rejected in writing, which is available for review.
Both (or better stated all of the major soteriological systems) start with the Bible. But they interpret many verses differently. All of them believe in the sovereignty of God. They just define differently. None of them believe man's will is stronger than God's will. Frewill is NOT a superpower. Calvinist don't believe they are insulting the character of God. All believe in predestination and foreknowledge. They just define and use them differently.
@@SpaceCadet4Jesus Where is your evidence for that? Be careful in accusing your fellow brothers and sisters of Christ. The Bible says, "You shall not bear false witness..." The ones who usually resort to accusing someone are the ones who cannot defend their worldviews in intellectual discourse.
@@dpcrn I agree! Calvinism doesn't strip a man of his responsibilities. Certainly not! Yes, repentance and faith are necessary to be saved. Both Arminians and Calvinists believe in that. But where we differ is that Arminians stop at the man. Making man the final arbiter of his Christian faith. Calvinists don't do that. Because we are looking at it in the grand scheme of things where we can see God doing everything for man to be saved. Repentance and faith are not innate to man but something that is alien to him. How do we know that? The Bible tells us so..." "Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." - Heb. 12:2 Left on his own, man will never turn away from his sins and surrender to Christ. He'd rather go to hell before he does that. It would take an act of the Triune God to make that happen. The Father needs to elect him, then Yeshua needed to die and be resurrected for him, and the Holy Spirit has to make him alive first and then bestowed his repentance and faith. So that when the gospel is preached to him, he would respond to it and bow down to his knees in grief and then will get up to follow the Lord Yeshua. Salvation is all of God and none of us. The only thing we contribute to it is our sins that make it necessary. Arminians do not fully understand that because their focus is on man and his free will. Freewill in its truest definition is about being sovereign. There is only one being in the universe and beyond who truly is sovereign and that is Yahweh. What man has is a creaturely will that is in bondage to sin. To say that man has a freewill therefore is to make him equal to God which is nothing short of a blasphemy.
@@songoku3046 I assumed this fact was common knowledge. The evidence is readily available, historically accurate and has been known since Calvin espoused Augustine's beliefs as his own. For a single scholarly treatise that examines a time-line of the written history get a copy of "The foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism by Dr. Ken Wilson, an Oxford scholar. His isn't the only book available, by far. If you want a quick read with a list of references, look at "Augustinian-Calvinism" in Wikipedia. Thankfully, Wikipedia is reporting the facts without error and has a volume of references to boot.
I was called a Calvinist before I even knew what one was. The Lord taught me the value of truth and honesty before I even was born again. I don't believe that you can be saved simply through an intellectual understanding. I believe that,that is impossible. You MUST be born again,the intellectual understanding comes as part of the gift of salvation. The Lord doesn't give us a Spirit of error or confusion. If a person claims to be saved but either doesn't or refuses to understand the plain sovereignty of our All-Mighty Creator, I would suspect that they don't know God at all. To Deny that God The Father chose exactly who He would save before the foundation of the earth and to make Him subject to mans free will,not only diminishes God to be our subject , but elevates man over God. These debates are good for the believer but I have never seen the opposition change their minds. I agree with my brother James White and would love the opportunity one day to just sit and talk about...
Well, I've had fun. This has made me think and it has made me think about Scripture. Dude, doesn't get any better than that! God bless all of you guys in this discussion. My prayer for us is that we make every effort to add to our knowledge, self control; to self control, perseverance; to perseverance, godliness; to godliness, brotherly kindness (pray especially for me for the fruit of kindness); to brotherly kindness, love. As this is how we will become effective and productive in our knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. I know that we all want to experientially know Him more and to make Him known. Thank you for putting up with me. I may have to go for a while. Lot on my plate. I love you all. Please forgive me for any transgressions or misunderstandings.
Mr Gregg, Great points about King and Father and our response. Also, well given definition on sovereignty. We don't have to believe God sovereignly dictates every thought and molecule if he does not say he does.
It appears your saying God doesn't have to be all-knowing. That God can somehow be neutered so as to make God more human. Bahahahaha..... My God is loving, just, powerful, and in control of all things.
@@JesusWordApologetics God is in full control, but that does not mean he dictates every thought and action man takes. He knows the future. He knows how every event will play out and what and when to intervene to accomplish His Will. It's very simple to understand.
James White is far more faithful to scripture than Steve Gregg. Love how he takes you verse by verse to keep it in context and drive his point home. Well done James!
@@JesusWordApologetics As with most Calvinists/Augustinians, they see all scripture through their doctrinal filter. That was obvious quite a few times throughout the 5 sessions. His belief goes in front of what he reads not the opposite way around. Gregg on the other hand reads and then interprets and establishes his beliefs.
The disagreements between the two sides (Monergism v Synergism) simply put, did God initiate faith in you, or not? Is faith a work of God or a work of man? Which is it?
Jesus' Word faith is not a work. But if you are asking did God Force me have faith, no. He gave me his word. When I hear his word I have the choice to believe. Nature itself testifies of God and I can choose to seek and believe. He determined the times and places I should live that IF I were to seek Him, He is near.
@@rickthomas5200 a work is defined as any activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result. Anything you do autonomously from God is a work by you. The whole notion of libertarian free-will is that your will prior to justification is autonomous from the effect or influence of God, otherwise, it wouldn't be libertarian. Also when you say "did God force me to have faith" then this would imply that you don't believe faith is a gift of God? Faith is a gift of the Lord to undeserving people such as you and me. It's the outworking of God’s electing grace and the atonement of Jesus for His own. Ephesians 2:8 confirms the truth that faith is ultimately a gift of God. “The gift of God” in the original Greek appears in the neuter grammatical form, which means that it refers back to both grace and faith earlier in the verse. Grace and faith are divine gifts, and our Father does not give them to all people.
Well I was given to Jesus supernaturally when i begged him to fill the void. I had to go through paranoid schizophrenia later in life, the scripture I held onto going through that was John 6:37-40. All those the father gives me will come to me. I will never cast you out. The will of God for the son is that he shall lose NONE of all those he has given him. I didnt know about reformed theology for a long time but I knew I was given from the father to Jesus and elected with just that scripture as my proof and that I couldnt lose my salvation because it was ordained by God himself.
So you begged but if reformed theology is true then that begging was irrelevant because you'd be irresistibly graced and unconditionally elected. Reformed theology contradicts scripture. Calvinism is a bunch of cleverly worded philosophical arguments for why scripture isn't true.
@@coryalbright9798 I disagree. I dont believe either camp are heretics, and both are saved. The diversity of denominations and doctrines is a strength. If reformed theology is a problem for you, you can go to a more free will emphasis church.
@@shanemccausland958 free will is not at all my concern. Scriptural authority is. Free will is what the arminians and calvinists squabble about. As Christians, we just be concerned with what The Bible says. So when Paul says "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;" and then the calvinist says "actually that's just the perceptive will of God, but He's unchangeably decreed that the Christians who commit fornication do so. " this contradicts scripture. When John says Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world the calvinist responds by saying that can't be true because Christ only died the calvinist version of the elect who will be gnosticly induced with faith at some point. Calvinism is a denial of scripture. This can't be treated with kids gloves. They are perverting God's word.
@@coryalbright9798 Well reformed people believe that you are only able to overcome sins if empowered by the holy spirit. The will of God is the prescription and the application is by the spirit. Only the elect will be saved in the end. Do you believe God knows the future? Do you believe God is trying (and failing) with all his might to save the unsaved? Why or why not. These are important questions. I feel that reformed and non reformed are two sides of the same coin, one just placing more emphasis on election and giving all the credit to God. The other placing emphasis on personal choice if you are saved or unsaved.
@@shanemccausland958 please hear me...the questions you are asking me are based on false dichotomies the calvinist set up to make opposing theology sound bad. No one can overcome sins on there own. The Holy Spirit dwells in the believer helping him to overcome AFTER belief. I can't save myself that's why my only hope is to trust in the One who can. Faith is not some meritorious act. Faith is the access point God has set up for salvation. You've heard the classic reformed argument of God trying and failing. I don't believe that. God's not trying to save anyone who doesn't believe. He will surely save all those who believe. Calvinists don't even know what the atonement does. This is proved by the doctrine of limited atonement. Reformed theology doesn't give all credit but rather gives all the blame to God The "reprobate" was literally created unable to believe which is the best excuse an unbeliever could gave. So in reformed theology Paul was wrong when he said the unbeliever is without excuse (all the double talk the calvinist uses to wiggle out of this just contradicts there beliefs) Bible believers give God all the credit. The Bible is clear, faith is not a work. In The Bible election is pretty much always to service and blessing. The calvinists have no idea about this though. It's not 2 sides of one coin. Calvinists don't believe scripture. They are perverting Scripture. Please stop buying into these false arguments from the james whites of the world. There's a reason no Christian believed this doctrine prior to a 5th century former gnostic.
There are many instances in the bible where God chooses (predestinates) people. If you're honest you won't be able to deny it. There are also instances in the bible where it indicates we are to choose God. However, is anyone saved apart from the Holy Spirit? I think the answer is of course no.
John 15:16 ESV You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
If we are dead in tresspasses and sins then we cannot be born again by our own choice. We have no choice. Dead people do not come out of the grave by an excercise of their will.
botchedonce What you are doing is equating spiritual death with physical death and this is wrong. If spiritual death meant people cant hear or think then God would not have instigated or created the scriptures so that people could hear and think. People dont have the power on their own to see the kingdom without being born again by the Spirit's power, but they can choose to submit.
@@heyman5525 incorrect. You cannot willingly submit unless God gives you power to submit. Submission opposes sin nature. You are powerless against sin unless Christ gives you freedom from it. “So then it does not depend on the one who wills or the one who runs, but on God who has mercy.” Romans 9:16
Ovious in their interpretation of romans 9 that steve gregg is inserting national service and national blessing to deny the true context. Paul is sorrowful because israel is not saved instead the gentiles got saved. mercy and wrath are salvation words not referring to service. In other words God didnt have i mind service but salvation of individuals and nations. God is free in His choices. this should end the long debate in favor of the true meaning of text. Most arguments against this truth are emotional not intellectual. im not a calvinist just a pauline that agrees with calvinist on their exegesis of romans 9. i think the context from romans 1 to 11 is about sin, salvation, sanctification, and sovereignty and not service which arminians inject in romans 9. How can you be so emotional against this ? because it offends human logic of fairness and interpretations based on traditions. God's sovereign free choices are understandably not palatable to humans. The arminian God of love is not just loving but sovereign just and rigteous in His choices.
The Calvinists see God as sovereign even if misguided humans claim that mercy for some and justice for the rest is unfair by their human standards. Arminians are trying to defend a God who really wants to save all humanity but lacks the ability to overcome the will of His creation. Which God is Biblical or even worthy of worship?
The question comes down to the extent of the atonement. Did Christ die to save everyone (universalism)? Did Christ die to save the elect (Calvinism)? Did Christ die to create a system of salvation that everyone can participate in, provided that they decide they want to (non-Calvinistic view)? If you're being consistent and honest, only the Calvinistic view of the atonement holds that Christ died for sinners. The non-Calvinistic view (which is only consistent in universalism) teaches that Christ died to create a system of salvation. In effect, no one was really saved by the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. They are only saved when, after the fact, they choose by their own free will to participate in the salvation system. It's their decision that saves them, not Christ. And in this system you have to abandon God's love for his people. Because you're holding to the fact that God has created a system that he will not bend to save anyone. God's love is limited to those who take the first step. I would also wonder if any one that hold's a non-Calvinistic view actually prays for the salvation of the lost. If so then why? You think God is done. He's already done his part and now it's up to the lost people to make their choice. He has no influence anymore. He's just sitting back and hoping people will chose wisely.
+Scot McPresbo I've actually experienced a lot of times where the first step I was to take became a commitment in my heart prior to experiencing any grace to go forward. It was as though the power to accomplish what was necessary did not arrive until a heart set on obedience was arrived at. You know the eyes of the LORD roam to and fro throughout the whole earth to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose hearts are perfect towards Him." (ie. fully committed). It was like there was a struggle in me as virtually everything that I saw and felt said, "No don't do it!" But the moment that I made up my mind in full commitment towards obedience, it was like I entered a rest as I was taking the step. I think this is analogous to the children of Israel crossing the Rea Sea or the priests with the Ark crossing the Jordan. Hebrew tradition has it that the water parted only after their respective feet entered the swelling Jordan River. I find this consistency rather reassuring. Now I wouldn't say that a first step of faith is prerequisite to God's love. Just that you do not have "completed faith" until faith and actions unite to work together. James 2:22, "You see that his (Abraham's) faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he (Abraham) did." I will further say that though God loves you, you cannot please God without completed faith, Heb. 11:6.
+Charles Packwood I guess I'm confused when you say "I've actually experienced a lot of times where the first step I was to take........" Since we're discussing soteriology, then I have to assume you're saying that you've been "saved" or "made a profession of faith" many times. The discussion is not about every single act of obedience a believer will make. Furthermore, I believe you're allowing your experience to drive your theology. I certainly remember coming to faith in an Arminian church. Explained through their theological system, I was making the first step to enter into a "relationship with Christ." However, this isn't the picture given in scripture. In scripture we see over and over again that it is God that initiates the faith that causes a believer to repent. And not only does He initiate the faith, but He follows it through by providing the Spirit for sanctification and the completion of His good work. From start to finish, the Bible reveals that it is God who saves his people, not his people that save themselves. And I'm very thankful for that.
Right, I've had experiences since salvation where I've had to have a heart that was not waivering back and forth on the task at hand. Which is to say that I had to sacrifice what I saw and felt to be right and take a stand on the direction that was biblical. Once I made up my mind, and totally rolled my trust upon the Lord, the inner turmoil and vacillation left and I took the step. That's when I found peace and enabling grace. Not while I was vacillating. I've had at least two times that come to my mind. Two were both different in the sense of "the obedience that comes from faith". In one I was in Mexico with a church planting team. We had just arrived in Orintanyo (sp?) in Chihuahua. I discovered a park as I was walking to a find a place to pray. Been cramped up in the car with the others of the team; they all went to sleep in the national pastor's house. The park was like built like a large wagon wheel, with a central gazebo in the middle. I was about to sit down when I hear God say "Not there, Over there." So God directed me to sit in a particular place. I just obeyed 'cause there was no real sacrifice to this obedience. As I sat there I knew that someone was going to get saved. So I looked around. Nobody. It must have been siesta time or something. But a great way off, I saw two individuals crossing the street. And I asked God, "Lord is it them?" Nothing. So I opened my Bible and began to prayerfully read Romans. As I got to Romans 10, I heard someone say, "Ah, La Santa Biblia." Something like that. I looked up and there was the two guys. Man, I was excited. Then the guy looked down at the text and said like, "Romanos". I said, "Yes, Romanos". He then preceded to read real so in English as best he could. Kinda slow and torturous. When he got through vs. 10, I asked him quite excitedly and pointing at him, "You, you Jesus Christo in corasone." I think that I used every Spanish word that I knew in that span of time. He said, pointing to his heart, "No, no Jesus Christo." I leaped to my feet and said, "You must come with me." I lead them excitedly to the national pastors house and woke everyone up, telling them that these guys needed Jesus. They awoke rather slowly but eventually separated the two into two rooms and began telling them the gospel. They both gave their lives to Jesus and I later learned that they were worship leaders in the church. It seems that when I had met them they were drug dealers looking for people who wanted to buy drugs from them. I believe my setting in a particular spot told them that I was there looking for drugs from them. Praise God, for using me for such a wonderful task! I'd rather be used like that than anything else.
On a second instance, I experienced a great deal of angst just prior to my obedience. I was working at Central Texas Iron Works in Abilene, Tx. I basically welded the component parts of large steel beams together: flanges to the beam web portion. I got so good at welding that I could do pray and weld at the same time. One day I was praying and drawing a bead down and God told me to tell everyone about Him. I mean it was just a short thing He said, but I instantly knew a lot of the details. Like I knew that I was to do it in the upcoming break in the break room. Well, I got kinda nervous, cause I didn't know what to say, and talking to a bunch of iron workers at break wasn't what I had in mind, at all. I had been studying in the Word about the obedience that comes from faith: Abraham in James, Romans 1:5, etc. Anyway a great fear came on me that I would not obey God. I was afraid of what would happen to me at work and I was even more afraid of not obeying God. Either way I was afraid. And I was praying so very hard for strength and courage to obey. At the time my thinking was like 1 Peter 4:17, where there is "the family of God" and "those who do not obey the gospel of God." I wanted so bad to be in the former and not numbered in the later. So I prayed. When I get in the break room I sit down at my usual place and just looked down and occasionally look at the clock. Time was ticking away, and so was my opportunity for obedience. My only friend, an independent Baptist, was sitting next to me. And he asked me if I was alright. I was so serious and afraid. Anyway a few minutes prior to everyone leaving, I stood up without knowing what to say and I began to speak. I told them that God told me to share with them something, because for some reason they were not able to hear from Him. I told them that Jesus died for them and loved them and wanted to love them even more, if they just gave them a chance. I was crying and shaking. Then I sat down. The baptist brother was beaming at me and you could have heard a pin drop in that room. Quiet like I'd never experience. Some preacher's, I've learned since then, call it a "holy hush". Anyway, after that all I experience from everyone, it seemed like, was trouble and more trouble. I would ask God, "Lord why did you have me do that? Where is the fruit?"Nothing for about a month. Then one day, a relatively new employee was sweeping up the break room as I was leaving and he stops me. He asks me: "Charles do you know why you stood up on that day and said what you did?" I said, "Yeah, cause God told me to." He asked me the same thing like two more times, and all I could say was the same thing. Then he says, "Charles, the reason that you said what you did, is on that week my wife had left me and everything was going so wrong in my life. I was thinking of committing suicide. But when you said what you did, I knew that Jesus loved me. Now, I'm a Christian and am going to church." Man, I was over joyed. And I didn't care if all I got was trouble from everybody, cause God had used me to win a soul.... But there was a moment, when I was vacillating, in my microscopic Gethsemane, where I wanted a plan B, something anything. Until I made up my mind to obey. I trembled in my obedience with no idea of what to say. Well, praise God, I'm still here and I think that guy, Clint's brother, is still here. That company closed up after I left to go to school.
@@coryalbright9798 that's not an Arminian view... See 2 Thess: 2:13 and Acts 13:48 Arminianism teaches election to salvation but conditional not unconditional Classical Arminian also teaches total depravity and the necessity of Grace for Salvation but that grace is prevenient not irresistible...
@Michael everyone believes grace is necessary for salvation. The calvinists and arminian just both share the sane false presupposition that the gospel being presented isn't enough.
@@coryalbright9798 I don't see any scripture to back that assertion up... Or a response to 2 thess 2:13 & acts 13:48 which clearly state election to salvation...
@Michael acts 13, 48 most definitely does not support calvinistic election. The jews opposed themselves and did not consider themselves worthy for eternal life while the Gentiles did. That's the juxtaposition of the verses. The "appointed" is in the middle voice. It's an action done by man. Notice it does not say "appointed from before the foundation of the world by God." Calvinism is a set of cleverly worded philosophical arguments for why scripture isn't true.
From the Calvinist vantage point of scripture God appears to be using his creation on a grande scale to entertain himself. He has a plan and no one has any say as to what happens anywhere along the way so as not to interfere with it in any way. If that is the case then it really doesn't matter what we believe or do because we are only going to do what God wants anyway. We are simply the players in a long running cosmological drama. If this is true then it also means that love is just an illusion because you can't have requited love unless you allow the other person the freedom to respond in love. The bible says that God IS love. There is no iniquity found in Him. So either Calvinism is missing something or the bible is a sham. It seems to me that Calvinism is focusing so hard on the authoritative power of God that they are missing the most powerful attribute of God which is love/agape. All you have to do is look at the cross to see this. There is no greater love. God does not have to muscle his way to the top because he's already there. He doesn't have to prove how mighty he is or create beings to fail so that he can be given more glory somehow through the redemption of it. His creation alone testifies of his awesomeness. When he created the world it was very good. It didn't fail because he secretly decreed that it would fail so that he could send his Son to fix up the mess and look good. His plan was always to walk among us. It did not please him when Adam sinned. It broke his heart but because God not only loves but he is love, he is more than able to express his ultimate love for us which he did by sending his only Son. This is why it pleased him to do so. He wanted to express his love for creation which is the most powerful force on earth.
If you paid any attention in Scripture.Ephesians 2 tells us how salvation happens,begins, and shows us that we are DEAD in Sin.Can a Dead man come without God's help?...Verse 4 and 5 "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)God doesn't have to save anyone,but because of his GRACE and Mercy,he elected to save Many.If he wanted to save ALL (every person head for head,past,present and future),every single person would be going to heaven.Even if God only saved ONE,he would be righteous in doing so! and remember,God is also a God of Wrath and will punish the wicked.That is why we NEED A Saviour in Jesus Christ to save us from our sins and the Wrath of God.(Romans 5:8-9)
You ask how can a dead man come without Gods help. In the same way the prodigal son did. The father said his son was dead and came alive. The son came to his own senses. The Father didn’t go out and drag him back. Dead is obviously used in a figurative way in scripture and not to be taken completely literally. You are right, God doesn’t have to save anyone but he wants to. He wants everyone saved because his intention from the very beginning was to be in a love relationship with his created beings. He sent his only Son to restore this relationship. There is no way to have a love relationship unless you allow the other person to love you back freely. God can’t force anyone to love him any more than you or I can. Therefore not everyone will be saved. If God truly loves his creation the way that the bible says he does he would offer his love to everyone, not just a few. He would not only pick and force a few lucky people to spend eternity with him and condemn the rest to eternal torment and punishment. If God can somehow override a man’s will and still allow him freedom (not at all logically possible) then he would do it for all not just a few because he won't contradict his very nature which is agape. It is not just to require something of someone that they are incapable of doing and then punishing them (let alone for eternity) when they can’t comply. Calvinism’s definition of sovereignty and justice has to be wrong because it’s a logical impossibility. The worst thing about it makes God responsible for evil if he determines everything that happens. There is no way around that fact.
L Morter, My question to you is what does justified mean? My second question would be who justifies according to scripture? The word justified (adj.) means, " *made right or just*," past participle adjective of justify (v.) "to show (something) to be just or right," from Latin iustificare "act justly toward, make just," from iustificus "dealing justly, righteous," from iustus "just" (adj.) + root of facere "to do," therefore "to afford justification," hence the meaning "to make exact." Who justifies according to scripture? Romans 8:33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? *God is the one who justifies*" Now looking at the chain of redemption in Romans 8:29-30, For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined *to become conformed to the image of His Son*, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; *and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.* I feel that those who believe that they come to Christ are not completely wrong in their perception of events. The process of justification does have reciprocal interaction with the Spirit which appears to us that we are coming to Christ, but in all actuality we are being *conformed to the image of His Son.*
I'm not clear on what your point is. Sorry. Of course God is the one who justifies and it is by his grace through faith. Our transformation is a process that happens after we submit ourselves. In order to submit we must first humble ourselves. God gives grace to the humble. That is something that must be done freely or it is coercion and not grace.
The gospel is the power of God unto salvation, not election of individuals. Dr White consistently parks in Romans 8 and 9, and not in Romans 3 or the rest of Romans.
@@kedrickgarland5343 He wasn't saying that, he was saying that you have to take the whole of the Bible, and not lean on 6 proof texts that make God into the same demon that Muslims, and other cults worship. Calvinism makes God a liar, all the talk about choosing, is just filler?
@@travissharon1536 How many times does God have to say anything before you believe it? Either it is God's inspired word, or it isn't. Secondly throughout the scripture God talks about his Sovereignty. Ezekiel 36:25-27 (Listen to who is talking and the doing) 25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. 26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. Ephesians 1:5-11 5 he predestined us2 for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 in him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight. 9 making known3 to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ. 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. 11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, Passages such as Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1:5-11 explicitly teach that God predestines some to salvation. God predestining who will be saved is based on His sovereignty, unchanging character (Malachi 3:6), foreknowledge (Romans 8:29, 11:2), love (Ephesians 1:4-5), and plan and pleasure (Ephesians 1:5). God’s desire is that all would be saved and come to repentance (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). He offers salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11), yet we know that not everyone will be saved. How this all works together can be debated, but predestination itself is absolutely a biblical teaching. Numerous other New Testament passages also refer to believers’ being chosen or elected to salvation (Matthew 24:22, 31; Mark 13:20, 27; Romans 8:33; 9:11; 11:5-7, 28; Ephesians 1:11; Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 1 Timothy 5:21; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1-2; 2:9; 2 Peter 1:10). We have a free will in the sense that we are capable of making moral choices. Our decision-making is impacted by numerous factors, though: e.g., our sin nature, our upbringing, our intellect, our training/education, our biology, our psychology, etc. So human beings do not truly have a free will, as popularly defined. We have a will. We can make decisions. Biblically speaking, we have the responsibility to respond to what God has revealed to us, including His call to believe the gospel (John 1:12; 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9-10; Revelation 22:17). But, again, our will is not truly “free” because we have constraints that shape our decisions.
@@kedrickgarland5343 You are attaching augustinian presuppositions to those verses, and ignoring the greater context. I agree with every verse in the Bible. Predestination does not mean God picked you from before the foundation of the earth. It means God had the destination of those who believe in Christ ready from before the foundation of the earth. You talk at me like I am unwilling to accept the word of God. In reality I am attempting to live my life according to the word of God. I don't want to come off as self righteous, but only cults take proof texts out of context to serve their agenda, and destroy the unified message of scripture in the process.
@@kedrickgarland5343 Look into non-calvinist/ majority and historically orthodox interpretation of ephesians 1 and Romans 8. They DO NOT explicitly say that God picks some before the foundation of the earth to be saved.
That's fine. But here's the problem. You believe in libertarianism (autonomous free-will). That man chooses Christ prior to any regeneration by God, hence autonomous from God's ability to change your heart. Therefore, you make yourself the progenitor of your own salvation. Now you can boast. Yet, scripture states otherwise; Ephesians 2:8-10, "For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, *and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance as our way of life*."
I don't believe all Calvinist points. I believe no one can come to God unless He draws them. Once we are called, I believe we can either accept or reject the call. It would not be boastful because only God can baptize a person with the Holy Spirit. we can choose to serve Jesus, but not all that chose Jesus is born again. we may choose Jesus but we still are dependent on God to baptize us with the Holy Spirit, making us born again.
Jesus' Word your Ephesians quote us actually speaking of a Israel, so Israel is predestined but o my the remnant. Not literally gentiles, no where in the old testament shows a prophecy that the messiah will come for the literal gentiles, but the gentiles that believe will cleave to Israel, that's why there's 12 gates and foundations and not 13.
@@kyles4633 You said we can accept or reject the call, the problem with that is that the sheep was given to Jesus (his bride), he is the one keeps the sheep not you. Jesus said "ALL which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. John 6:37-39 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Arminian position holds that “God draws all people, and therefore all people are able to come.” Therefore, John 6:44 logically entails universalism. Let's look at both soteriological positions: *The Arminian Position* (1) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44) (2) The him (all people) is able to come to Me, and the Father draws him (all people). Holds from (1), (2) *Therefore* (3) Jesus will raise him (all people) up on the last day (universalism). If all people are able to come and are drawn (i.e., if every „him‟ is able to come and every „him‟ is drawn), then every person (i.e., every „him‟) will be raised up on the last day. This is universalism. The Arminian will object by saying that Jesus only raises those who do come. That is to say, they want to understand the referent of him‟ as the one who actually comes. However, there is no mention of the one who actually comes in John 6:44. The Calvinist, as does the Arminian, believes that all those drawn have the ability to come. The Calvinist, contra the Arminian, also believes that all who are drawn will necessarily come and will be raised up on the last day. Regarding those drawn, the Calvinist believes that only the elect are drawn. *Calvinist Position* (1) [If he is able to come to Me, then the Father drew him], and I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44) (2) He (all the elect) is able to come to Me, and the Father drew him (all the elect). Holds from (1), (2) *Therefore* (2) Jesus will raise all the elect up on the last day. This conclusion is completely compatible with the Calvinist position. In a sense,the Father‟s drawing is a universal drawing. It is a universal drawing of the elect. That is to say, all of the elect will be drawn. The universal affirmative conclusion that the Father draws all the elect, and that all the elect will be raised up on the last day is articulated by Peter when he says, “The Lord is not slow about His promise…but is patient toward you, *not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance*.”
***** the atonement is certainly and absolutely universal, and no one goes to the lake of fire for sin, although they ARE sinners. What they go to hell for is rejection of Jesus Christ, which Jesus attested to, himself. John 6 and the drawing pertains to the 11, not one human more, except the possibility of The Apostle Paul. i already pot links to both the written and the video study on this fact of scripture. Those the father gives Jesus are none but the 11 and this is a prophetic message given by Jesus that was 100% fulfilled in the Garden.
buzzbbird, yet, John 12:32 states: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." We see in Romans 8:28-30, And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." The word "brethren" pertains to both male and female in the body of the church. So it begs the question: which of the apostles was a woman? Your links were blocked as spam.
particular redemption is obvious... God knows whom He will be eternally in holy fellowship with for all of eternity... omniscience of the non-elect has ramifications... I just believe that the Augustinian view doesn't explain it correctly... the Semi-pelagian view is FAR worse and it is really not election or predestination at all. Universalism is heresy, demonic deception and a perversion of the gospel. It is EVIL. Plain and simple.
***** The convicting power of the Holy Spirit is actively working on the hearts of men. Even in creation declaring the glory of God, there would be no affect aside from the work of the Holy Spirit. The very fact that ALL men are without excuse, seems to indicate the ubiquitous working of God's Spirit. Thus men are continually either denying self-evident truth or acknowledging it; resulting in either a hardening or a softening of the heart. The fact that the Father draws an individual does not mean that he will submit to God. The fact that a person submits to God does mean that he was first drawn. Thus, there is no boasting from man.
I mean this guys a 'propheser' but he talks about God's free will and not man's..Like they are mutually exclusive. The honest take on Calvanism is that its nonesense..in the most literal form of the word.
Paul Stevenson, what is a 'propheser'??? Are you saying Dr. White professes God's free will and not man's? Yep. That would be the point. Romans 3:24, " *for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God*, being justified *as a gift* by His (the Father) grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus." Romans 3:24 would be in line with what is stated in Romans 8:29-31, "For those (elect) whom He (the Father) foreknew (foreknew asserts those He knew before time existed - asserts past tense knowledge), He (Father) also predestined (meaning "allotted," a past participle adjective from to give (v.) or gift; also with a noun sense of "fate") to become (come to be) conformed (from con- ‘together’ + formare ‘to form’) to the image (semblance or likeness) of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn (in your right of succession in the chain of redemption) among many (the majority of people) brethren (fellow elect); and these (the elect) whom He (Father) predestined (destine (elect) for a particular fate or purpose (particular election)), He (Father) also called (past tense to call or summon); and these (elect) whom (past tense action) He called (past tense to summon), He (Father) also justified (past tense to declare or make righteous in the sight of God); and these (elect) whom (past tense action) He justified, He also glorified (past tense decree of being translated into the glory of God). What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us (the elect), who (the non-elect) is against us?" "For the wicked is reserved for the day of calamity; They will be led forth at the day of fury. "Who will confront him with his actions, And who will repay him for what he has done? Job 21:29-31 Also see Job 18:21, Proverbs 24:20, Proverbs 2:12, Proverbs 12:13....
Amyra Bynt Yhwh Yes I agree with a lot of what you said. With that said I have brothers who are Calvanits and I love them a lot but I tend not to agree with their beliefs and the 5 points of Calvanism. 'Some' of them are quite aggresive, some (more mature and humble) are not..None of us have 'all' truth and its worthing having the humility to be mindful of that..we know in part (1st cor 13:9) but on the whole I dont think the bible teaches 5 point calvanism and it cna be an offensive doctrine actually and if you take it to its logical conclusion (as 'i' see it) it means 2 very different Gods-This is the ultimate problem with the doctrine I think. But nonethelss I have good brothers who are Calvanists and I think we all also need to be mindful of immaturity and unnecessary division. We are all vulnerable to Satan coming on here to these youtube forums and getting in to haughty 'pride' driven arguments and 'insults'-I am guilty of that and I am mindful of that and whether calvanists or 'non' Calvanists we agree on that we are Christs representatives and how important Love is amongst the bretheren. Difference in opinon is inevetable. I just dont subscribe to Calvanism and for those that do, well thats part of their walk and we'll let the lord lead as he will.
Paul Stevenson I think what Calvanists 'miss' (as i u'stand them-And this can be a problem cos there are inconsistencies in not only their doctrine but how their doctrine impacts on their walk cos they are often like 'non calvanists' in that regard) is God's desire for 'R'ship' with mankind. They seem to me to have a doctrine that has a God who is a domineering control freak. Now I know I wouldnt ultimately get a lot of out of 'any' r'ship if it was 'my way or the high way' and 'making' someone love me. I dont believe at all this is the God revealed in Scripture..I may even go as far to say I may not be Christian or be in a r'ship with this God if I believed it was true of him-Apart from having one out of downright FEAR..I mean this is so not the God nailed to a cross saying 'Father forgive them' I do of course have a fear of God out of reverend 'respect' and recognising his authority but still these are 2 very different things. This idea of 'r'ship and wanting r'ship (and not domineering control freak) is what I perceive to be the reality of whatScripture reveals about God. And therefore its sad in my opinion that they hold to this 'other' view of God...as i see it God through the Holy Spirit in Scripture has incessantly 'repeated' the idea and the 'importance of 'relationship' and loyalty and love 'between' and this is alos mirrored in 'marriage' and family...So i must say I find it a 'strange' doctrine..
Amyra B. Actually Calvinism Presents God's character (nature) and Man's character (nature). We like to hear all this good stuff that God is a God of love, mercy and justice; and He is. But as soon as the finger is pointed back at us and our nature and what we deserve according to mans nature, the humanists philosophers jump up and down and say see, I am not a robot! I am not evil! If God was completely just we should all be damned to hell. The essence of Arminianism and its origins, Pelagianism denies original sin and man's natural, essential hatred of God
He knows, its a debating tactic. I am getting sick of this on both sides. I have had it with the dishonesty. They both know each side very well. They have been debating this topic for decades. As James White has said many times, we are the judges. He and all of these guys are not trying to convince each other but us. I just watch them for a couple of reasons. The most interesting reason is that after 30 plus years of watching Calvinism and Arminianism Debates, I am waiting for one to be won by an Arminianist. If you know of one please let me know.
Fat Mann, being that debates are quite subjective, I'm sure many Arminians would say that they win all the debates. While I, like you, have yet to see them win, somehow they are still the majority of what is called Christian, there must be a lot of goats sitting in church pews. Bias is a very strong motivator, as is emotion, for the synergist view, as is control, pride & fraternity.
Fuzzy Counsellor it's hard to find a winner in 2 doctrines that are unsound, but I think Steve eeked this one out and James White started with his childish antics when confronted.
G Checker, "James White started with his childish antics" could you give me a time on this video where this is occurring, just want to see what you mean. One other question: are you a molinist? because your position "2 doctrines that are unsound" is what they say. Thanks!
I started to think that brother Steve was non partisan and the only other non partisan that I knew was Dr. Brown. Then at the begining of this video he said that Calvinists don't believe that God has the freedom to be free. SMH That's nonsense. God is Law Giver, not Law taker. My five point Calvinist Professor from my college who graduated a 5 Point, not 4 POINT from DTS. God can do whatever He wants, PERIOD. If He wanted to He could have chose to save everyone, He didn't. We only believe He is what He is and does what He does because that is what Scripture teaches. In my Sunday School class who are mostly Arminianists, I am teaching them a very controversial Biblical Worldview. To get the point across to "these Arminianists" I must ask them to listen to me. They must respect what I am going to say, so I am explaining to them why I won't teach Calvinism and Arminianism as if I were to teach it, I would only teach both sides fairly and let them decide. I know all the cheats on both sides. I went to an exceptional Bible College that had both Calvinists and Arminianists and only cared if you knew they systems but more important how to Study the Scriptures. So I tell them what I would ask before I would ever teach them Calvinism and Arminaianism. This is the question. "Do you believe that God has that Freedom to choose some for heaven but not everyone?" Not only do I and Calvinists believe this, I have met a small amount of Arminianists who do. I have heard other biases in this episode. Get a grip. Perhaps you knew you were loosing. I have seen this in most of these debates.
The issue synergists (Arminian's) have is; If man is responsible for giving birth to some nebulas measure of faith, then how do synergists escape the notion of a works theology? If man is the progenitor of faith, and if by grace through faith we are saved, then man is the progenitor of his own salvation by his work. His work being faith. A 'work' being defined as an 'activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.' This is plain and simple works salvation.
I'm not sure why you responded in that way. You're preaching to the choir. In fact I believe that the New Birth in John 3 is the only way you can see physically (some day) and spiritually (when you believe). In Ephesians 2:8,9 the gift is "salvation and faith". My only point was that Steve started to show his true colors in this video. James White is also guilty of this too, I see his debates with Michael Brown, They both do the same debates over and over in different places so much, its like a show. In the 90's I did some limo work at Newark Airport and would watch both sides of the family and friends feuds who were on Jerry Springer, Richard Bay and other shows like that. They would fly in from wherever their last show was. They weren't feuding then. They seemed pretty friendly. Its all a show. I'm not saying that Michael Brown and James White shouldn't talk to one another or be friends, no, no, oh no. On the contrary, I commend them for their maturity. I don't like the fact that they know how each other feel about subjects and what they believe and act surprised many times. Steve started out very honestly but I believe he got to comfortable and for ratings or just to win an argument he started to act like Calvinism was so wrong, it surprised him. Give me a break. I don't know you, but I know that I have been studying this for over 35 years and know both sides well enough to know what each believes historically, traditionally and even the different variations today. When I was learning this in college, James White was already debating on Ankerberg about KJO. He's got a ten year head start on me and he is by far more capable in studying then I. So if I know this stuff, he should know it inside out.
God has the freedom to create whichever type of world He wants. I certainly believe God has the freedom to choose some for heaven but not everyone. I just don’t think the Bible teaches that he does. He has the freedom to give people free will and the ability to reject His grace. He also has the freedom to create a world where everyone goes to hell for His glory (however sending people to hell glorifies God). Calvinist shouldn’t be so quick to co-opt terms like freedom, sovereignty, and (doctrines of) grace- all Christians affirm these things. We differ on the details.
LOL, the clay, indeed, decides if God will make him a vessel of honor or not: 2Ti 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 2Ti 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 2Ti 2:21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
buzzbbird, 2 Tim 2:19-21, is talking about those in Christ. We see in 2 Tim 2:3-4, who Jesus is speaking of: "Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier." How could the autonomous free-will agent be enlisted if it is according to prevenient grace and the autonomous man to actuate that grace? Also, where do you get the notion that the reformed view denies man has free-will? We deny that you are the progenitor of your salvation. Very different then what your attempting to portray.
*****I think you are saying that someone has given the impression that they believe that grace is initiated by man. That is wrong, of course. But you can receive the grace of God in vain. This scripture is irrelevant if all of the elect will inevitably not receive the grace of God in vain. It would also be kind of foolish for Paul to beg, plead or urge them not to receive God's grace in vain, if as the elect that possibility were impossible. 2 Cor 6:1.
Jesus' Word, verse 21 is talking only about those in Christ? The dishonorable vessel is first mentioned and is in contrast with the honorable one. The honorable vessel is “set apart” or holy. If he is contrasting the honorable vessel as set apart and the dishonorable as not set apart, how can the dishonorable vessel be considered someone in Christ? You must be set apart to be in Christ, and it’s clear that there is a distinction made. The only way to become useful and set apart is to become a vessel of honor. This also follows Paul’s thought when he just got done talking about Hymenaeus and Philetus departing from the truth, and then contrasting them with true believers that depart from iniquity (verse 19). If we look at Romans 9-also alluding to Jeremiah 18-the vessel of dishonor is on the path to destruction. Certainly if we read these scriptures together we can’t come to the conclusion that the vessel of dishonor is a Christian. I don’t think you have a biblical case that the vessels of dishonor are in Christ.
About 8 years ago the Bible started to make more sense to me thru Whole Biblical Historical Preaching. Before then scripture never made much sense to me. Example: In (Romans 10:9-10), if you confess with your mouth your save or (Matthew 10:32-33). But in (Matthew 7:21-23), Jesus says not everyone who calls me Lord' Lord'. That calls themselves a Christian are going to heaven, Why? Basically my or anyone confession is worthless now for they were never born again. It seems there's a big debate in difference in mixer in the Bible. In which views are biblical correct? I know it's important to read Bible verses in content and context in Historical time of events. It's the big debate that Calvinism believes in Regeneration first then Repentance second. Arminianism believes in Repentance first then Regeneration second. Which views are biblical correct? To the human mind it's impossible to know who are God's elect. But it makes perfect since to God and His will. People are always saying what if I am not one of God's elect? But what if you are? If God saves you or not, I will always put 100% of my trust in Jesus for my salvation and not myself. For I know about my depravity sinful nature I was born with and why it's by His grace (Eph. 2:8-9). And in (Romans 10) you need to read the whole book of Romans to understand what Apostle Paul was teaching. Public Confession was the evidence of confession by believing in the heart. The evidence of faith which is a free gift of God. And in (Matthew 10:32-33) is taking out of context and is abuse in churches today. Back up server Bible verses to (Matthew 10:17-25) you will notice the author is talking about someone who is already a believer. And Public confession is not the means of salvation but the evidence of salvation. Go to www.gotquestions.org called (Is Public Confession Necessary Salvation? (Romans 10:9-10)? I would like to add that most people don't want to go to hell. But many won't repent from their sinful lifestyle to be saved. So you might ask this question to (Is God Sovereign or do we have a free will)?
This is only sad because both points are wrong. People like to think that Calvinism and Arminianism are opposites when in fact they are the same view from different perspectives.
As far as you have explained that, I agree. That's often how I explain it as well. They are both true at the same time depending on perspective. However, taken within, and limited to the classical definitions as layed out by both John Calvin and James Arminius, I side with Calvin
Both sides agree that God perfectly knows the future. Is the future knowledge something passive? God created and then reacted. Or is it flowing directly from his creative decree as God. I believe we have a will and choices, but those choices are flowing directly from the creative decree, and you cannot recieve the son unless God puts his spirit in you and it doesnt depend on human will or exertion, but rather God who has mercy. Genesis 50:20 is very important scripture concerning this. You have one creature will action here, the selling of their brother into slavery. And you have two intentions. They intended this action for evil, while God intended it for good. In the end Gods goodness will be revealed in all things, and all evil intentions will be punished either by your own merit or by the blood of his cross.
An unconverted man can only choose a false god for himself,no matter what he "chooses" to name him.Anyone who claims that salvation depends on the man who wills and runs instead of Christ's life,death and resurrection,has another Gospel.Without God's regeneration of the heart first,no one can repent and believe in the Christ of the Bible.
+Tim Ballentine Did the Ninevites repent in such a way as to be accepted by God. Matthew 12:41ff - The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. The phrase "in the judgment" is interesting. I find it amazing that the presence of the "men of Nineveh" in such a court would be enough to condemn an entire generation. (What of the women, the children, the animals in sackcloth"... sorry I digress) **** At what point did the men of Nineveh experience "God's regeneration of the heart" before there repentance? ****
Charles Packwood Yes,their regeneration took place before their repentance Salvation has always taken place in the O.T.just as it did in the N.T.,by grace.God must take out one's heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh in order to repent and believe.A baby can only cry after it's birth and a dead sinner can only cry out to God after his new birth.It's the word of God that is spirit and life,so I would say that it's God who opens the ears and eyes to His word that brings spirit and new life to the dead sinner.Remember,God knows all of His people before they ever hear the Gospel(He also knows all of the goats by name as well ),He calls a thing a name in the beginning and whatever name God gives something they will become that thing in time.So God loved His Elect and called them His sheep before the creation of the world and everyone of them will become His sheep in time.Those in Ninevah,even while in the midst of gross sin were God's sheep,they already belonged to God even before God opened their hearts to believe what Jonah preached and that's how it was and is with every believer in Christ..
+Tim Ballentine ... Acts 10:30. Paul preaching to the men of Athens: "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now He commands all people everywhere to repent." OK, Paul speaking for God (that would take either major faith or major presumption) states that God Almighty commands all people everywhere to repent. So either this is true or false. If true then does God commands everyone to have "God's regeneration of the heart" since it is a prerequisite to repentance. Then, if God knows that only the elect will respond does He command people who cannot respond, to respond? Then, either God's command does not carry the necessary power with it to enable obedience?!. OR God's command is unjust OR God's elect is "all people everywhere". If untrue then the Apostle Paul's doctrine of salvation at this time lacked the revelation of Calvin's or your tenants of salvation. Which casts a perplexing doubtful shadow upon a large majority of New Testament scripture; reaffirming what many silently affirm that John Calvin should have penned most of the New Testament.?.
+Tim Ballentine Unfortunately, we have Jonah's sermon in its entirety. Consisting of approximately 7 words. None of which alludes to salvation, a heart of flesh or stone, Jeremiah's text or Ezekiel's. We also have no record of Jonah having had printed any tracts or Bibles. Sometimes what is not said is deafening, but since it is Scripture it becomes of infinite importance. Also, no one has EVER, in either Testaments, utilized this same template in preaching.
+Tim Ballentine ... So they were saved by grace. At this point in time had Jesus' blood been applied to the altar in heaven, of which the one in Moses' time was a pattern and type? (cf Hebrews)
I am a reformed theologian. But I really like how Steve Gregg has explained his position through the bible.
Steve's opening sums up the non calvinist view very well. And scripture supports this view.
James White - The Undisputed World Champion of Theological Strawmen and many other various and sundry logical fallacies.
😂😂😂
I was an Arminian for 10 years and never was taught anything about Calvinism, however I saw many scriptures that seemed to teach that God was choosing His own people. I was confused coming from a FREE WILL background. So when God saw fit for me to have 5 shoulder surgeries, I finally had the opportunity to study those verses that showed God as being the decider on who He saves.I prayed, read about the reformation , listened to debates and explanations of the reformed understanding and then God convinced me that it was the truth and I left my former church and now go to a reformed Baptist church.When God finally showed me the truth, I felt born again, again.
He is the decider on who He saves, indeed. And who are those that He decides to save? Those who repent and believe.
That’s great. Glad you got saved from Arminianism.
@@mr.f6912
Maybe you can help save me from it. Would you mind answering some questions for me that I can’t seem to fit into the Calvinist paradigm?
John 12:39 ¶ Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
Why did God have to supernaturally prevent these people from believing if they were incapable of doing so in the first place? My understanding of Calvinism is that men are naturally totally depraved and incapable of believing. That faith has to be given to them in order to believe. John says that God had to harden them so that they wouldn’t.
What are your thoughts on this?
Thanks.
@@evanu6579 The verse says it was to fulfill the prophesy from Isaiah. Many believed Jesus was the Messiah because he was performing great miracles but many Jews and even the Apostles didn’t understand at the time of his earthly ministry what all that entailed. They thought the Messiah was going to save them in the way Moses saved them from Egypt and rule as King David once did. Jesus even rebukes Peter in Matthew 16:23 because Peter didn’t fully understand what Jesus was sent to accomplish on the cross. Even up to the soldiers coming to arrest Jesus Peter tries to fight the soldiers by slashing off one of their ears, but Jesus tells him to stand down. This shows that even the Apostles didn’t fully understand Gods plan for salvation at the time.
So everything being done was to accomplish God’s will and plan for salvation because if the Pharisees believed he was the Messiah they would never have had him crucified and they would crown him as king.
14 After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, “Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.” 15 Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.
John 6:14-15 | NIV
These Jews believed in Jesus and were about to make him king by force but later in the chapter many of them stop believing. Jesus doesn’t want them to crown him as king because he hasn’t yet finished his earthly ministry and he did not come to be king in the way they understood it. God is doing the same thing to the Jews in John 12:39 that he did to Pharaoh.
Also notice how in John 12:42 many of the leaders did believe but they wouldn’t openly acknowledge it because they feared man more than God. So they had faith but not saving faith.
42 Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not openly acknowledge their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved human praise more than praise from God.
John 12:42-43 | NIV
@@Ephesians-rz7zp
Sounds like you’re saying that they couldn’t see the kingdom. So no one was born of the Spirit at that time? I would agree.
I didn’t see anywhere in your answer how God hardened their heart to prevent them from believing lest He should heal them. Seems like you’re in agreement with the point I was making with the passage. They could have believed in their natural state to the point of salvation but God had to supernaturally prevent them. You just expanded it to more people.
I can see truth in both views but personally I lean more towards Calvinism.
Calvinist doctrines must be negatively infered in scripture. Its not positively stated anywhere in The Bible
@@coryalbright9798
Never mind its tendency to extrapolate into numerous logical fallacies.
@@PETERJOHN101 such as?
Read the historical sources where the beliefs of Calvinism came from. No, they didn't come from Bible interpretation, they are read "onto" the Bible.
Its a repeat of Augustinianism, which itself is a repeat of Gnostic, Greek/Roman Stoic and Manichaeist ideas interjected in Christianity. We have the historical documents and anybody with a will can learn how the Church became infected with these ideas. Take the Red pill.
@@SpaceCadet4Jesus
Predestination is written all over the Bible. Someone must be quite blind not to see it. 😊
Gregg clearly states that salvation *is* in view in Romans 9, as it's a benefit of being in Christ. White continues to accuse Gregg of claiming it's not about salvation. Does he even listen?
White has his talking points..But he can't think
I know, right? I just listened to that part. I was impressed by Steve's explanation of Romans 9, and surprised (though, I shouldn't be at this point) that James completely strawmans his position.
James White is a very good speaker and he can influence many people to Calvinism. The Arminian side to follow the bible is supported many times in differents books in the bible, we have to change our attitudes and following the teachings that has been given to us, even if we have recieve grace.
I find it funny that James White accuses Steve Gregg of eisegeting the Bible when he's simply using scripture to interpret scripture, whereas James White is constantly eisegeting Calvinism into the scripture throughout all of these debates.
If God controls everything and men have no free will of their own to decide, then this debate would never happen.
Why wouldn’t it?
There would be no point to write the Bible, God is just playing a video game.
Terrible logic
Your comment proves you don’t understand Calvinism, brother. I can explain if you care to learn.
I'm sorry but thats simply not true , I read the bible from cover to cover in context at the least 4 times. And everytime I read it its nearly impossible for me to see that man has a completely free will and are salvation works with God rather then him completely saving us. And I'm not a calvinest lol but I certainly can't disagree with one eather the bible is clear
I am in the same boat as you. I dont consider myself a calvinist. I however don’t disagree with any of their doctrines 🤫 I used to hold a feeling of resentment towards the view of calvinism, that was until GOD granted me the ability to come to true faith and repentance that i understood it to be true.
I do however disagree with most calvinists on what seems to be their preferred belief on eschatology. Ive found many if them to hold to the postmillennial and some to the a-millennial view.
@@AreJay_ that's interesting because me myself am a postmillennial lol thing was I believed revelations haven't came to pass just 2 years ago (premillennial). I switched after reading the scriptures that say Jesus returns after his enemies are his footstool. And then ofcourse there's just basic history how the roman empire was called Babylon and nero who's name in greek is 666 persecuted the church for 42 months , which is spot on with the scriptures. There's much more but it takes research to find.
@@AreJay_ I know atheist who say the Calvinist view is the correct view. If they were gonna be Christians they would be Calvinist. That’s a non bias opinion with no dog in the fight
@@semper3796 no on the contrary his point is if you read the bible with out bias or being taught you'll come to a calvinest conclusion.
@@semper3796 it's not out of the normal lol
I love Steve Gregg CLEARLY explaining his understanding of God's Word . But the calvinists like to read their view in to the Bible.
Here is absolute Biblical proof that God does NOT cause or determine everything; In Jeremiah 19:5 God says, “They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal-something I did NOT COMMAND or mention, nor did it enter my mind.” 2nd Peter 3:9 says, “The Lord is…not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance.” and yet, it also has Jesus saying, "Broad is the road that leads to destruction (hell) and many are on it, but straight and narrow is the road that leads to life (Heaven) and few ever find it." So, as a Calvinist, do you really believe that God arbitrarily creates some people for one reason; to burn for eternity in hell?
Jer. 19:5 indeed says “I did not command” meaning God did not tell or speak to the Israelites to sacrifice to Baal. This doesn’t mean God did not determine these things to come to pass, as “command” does not equal determine - it means He did not tell his people to do those things (they sinned greatly.) if you were to believe God didn’t determine it to come to pass, how would you reconcile that notion with Heb 1:3 which says God upholds all things by the word of his power? Also Col 1:17 that in Him (Jesus) all things hold together?
1. You said “The scriptures said Christ died for all the calvinist says no”.
Precise theological thinking is a good thing. We are called to be students of the Word (2 Timothy 2:15). But on this point, it seems that most people follow a theological system to get to their answer, rather than the clear Word of God. If it were not for theological systems (namely, Calvinism and Arminianism), the question of whom Jesus died for would probably never come up-but it has come up! One side says that, if Christ did not die for all, then there can be no genuine offer of salvation. The other side says that, if Christ died for some who will never be saved, then His death in some sense fails to accomplish its purpose. Either way, there seems to be an attack upon God’s character or Christ’s work-either God’s love is limited or Jesus’ power is limited. This presents an unnecessary dilemma and creates a tension where none need exist. We know that God’s love is infinite (Psalm 107:1) and that Christ’s power is infinite (Colossians 1:16-17). The dilemma is a false one of our own making.
In short, the offer of salvation is universal-to all who will believe (Romans 10:11, 13). We also know that, regardless of how broad Christ’s atonement is, it is limited in some respect-it is effective only for those who believe (John 3:18).
John 10 provides more insight into the issue of whom Jesus died for. In that passage we see that Christ died for His sheep (John 10:11, 15). Also, all who are His sheep will come to Him (verses 4 and 27), and they are kept secure in Christ (verses 28-30). However, when we share the gospel, we don’t try to “pre-screen” the hearers of the message. We don’t delve into who are the elect or for whom Jesus may or may not have died. Those discussions would distract from the goal of evangelism. When presenting the gospel, we simply say, “Jesus died for your sin, and He rose again from the dead. His death is sufficient to pay for your sins if you will put your faith in Him.” This is a biblically accurate statement, and it avoids trying to get too specific. The preaching of the apostles in the New Testament doesn’t try to cut it more finely than that.
2. You said “ The scriptures say it pleased God to save those who believe the calvinist says He causes belief in them that He saves”
God is talking here not John Calvin, Ezekiel 36:25-26
25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
Why didn’t God ask them to change their heart? Why is God making them walk in his statutes without their will, did he consult Calvin? He is forcing them to keep his judgements and do them. John Calvin was nowhere around.
3. You said “The scriptures say Jacob was chosen for service The Calvinist says Jacob was chosen for salvation and Esau for reprobation”
When I read this scripture Paul (Inspired by the holy spirit) is giving examples of God’s decision making process, he brings up Jacob and Esau moves on to Pharaoh and then on to clay vessels, seems like the point being made is about God’s Sovereignty and not about servitude.
Romans
22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction?
23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-
24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
25 As he says in Hosea:
“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”[i]
I did not see Calvinism anywhere in the scripture, but I did read where Jesus said “37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.” You said everyone who thinks that way was inspired by Calvin, was Jesus inspired by Calvin?
Propitiation for the whole world - how can you even quote any part of John and miss that so clearly?
@@dankmartin6510 Universalism
@@kedrickgarland5343 That is just a charge you hurl at people who read the Bible and do not agree with your binding of the Blood.
Bogus conclusion. If someone fails to accept a gift that doesn't change the gift in any way other than to whom the gift belongs. The gift is 100% effectual, but you have to turn the power on.😉
@@JamesBrown-fd1nv where did you read because anything you say should come from scripture where did you read that we have to turn it on, where did you read? It is something that we do that gets us saved
Dr. White good example of that atheists perspective..👍🏼🤦🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️😆
Synergists elevation of man’s autonomy to buffoonish and illogical levels will always make me laugh.
Calvinist/Reformed people are fond of sticking to a limited passages of scriptures and not considering the teaching of the whole Bible.
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased.
But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help.
This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit.
This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.".
.
.
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
-Acts 3:19
Armenians scrub the book of Revelation, along with many endtime passages to try and prove their weak position.
Part of me loves Steve G. He, unlike many who have debated Dr. White, respectfully calls White, “DR. White” and I respect that. Catholic Ass-hats like Sungenis & some Muslims call him, “Jim” during debates. All that aside he’s a clear thinker and would wipe my butt in a debate, however, White dismantled him in almost every respect. He also shows HIS respect by listening to 12+ hrs of Greg’s materials and never mis-representing his opponent’s’ positions. I think Steve is honest, but I also truly believe he is Wrong! Nonetheless he is a brother in Christ, and I know Dr.White would want me to think of him as such!!
Again Mr Gregg making an assumption that all Calvinist have become Calvinist, because they were taught that way the way I was taught was through scripture and the Holy Spirit, illuminating the Scriptures to me. It wasn’t taught to me by a man , it was revealed to me by the illuminating work of the Holy Spirit through the word of God, as I being a Arminian at the time! It was the Holy Spirit that had me become a Calvinist when I was a Arminianist
Listening to Steve Gregg explain the truth of scripture to James White is like listening to a father instruct his 5 year old. My take, anyway.
Explain, elaborate
Yeah ok
Agree!!!
Because White is awful with the Bible
lol. Listening to Steve is like listening to a cry baby say it’s all love love love 😂. His exegesis is excruciatingly awful. How Steve became a teacher is beyond me. Goes to show you can do anything even if it means being super emotional and running with emotions instead of reason 😂
Not a single text James White uses proves conclusively and effectually forces people to be saved. He has to focus on a couple of specific verses to try to prove his point. But the Bible cover to cover from Genesis 1:28 and 29 and on clearly denotes God having chosen to create a world where libertarianism exists. In fact evening Genesis 1:26 libertarianism is inferred when God says, "Let us make man in our likeness".
Romans:9.16 ) so it is nor of him who wills or runs but of God who shows mercy
The words free will are not in the bible. Only God has free will to do as he pleases
@kylestaack38 neither are ate words rapture or Trihune God found in Scripture, but we use them to describe a concept. -'Free will' given to man begining with Genesis 1 is found cover to cover in the Bible when one reads the Bible for what it says, and not blinded with Calivimstic lenses.
@kylestaack38 Thank you for the confirmation verse of God's mercy in having provided a means of Salvation to all who in repentace turn to the cross of Christ and His finished Atoning work on the cross as their only means of Salvation. God didn't have to extend it to wicked sinners, but He did.
Free will went out with the fall and the curse adam . We are Free to make choices but since the fall everyone is dead in trespasses and sins . Will and choices are not the same. Free will is a heresy by Satan. Show me one verse where it says we have Free will or our will is free?
43Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. 44No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.
(John:6.43-44)
The beautiful thing is that God directly interacts with us. Did you sot down with a bible and say hummm i reason this too be true therefore i believe? I know from my personal experience that i was convicted almost like a massive judgement came and grace all at the same time. I did not choose too believe God chose too make me believe. He did so in Grand fashion in my experience. It was sudden and massive and ripped my then life apart but i still had his peace then he rebuilt my life much much greater than i could. God is great and none of us deserve anything except danmation nothing we do can give us salvation or even earn a step towards it. It is he and he alone.
I've seen a lot of Dr white. I must come to the conclusion that he is either deeply deceived or a deceiver.
I've looked into it deeply, Augustine was the first to bring the idea of the Elect as Calvinists know it.
I don't believe he can be convinced, or is even capable of entertaining a non-calvinist view without the grace of God.
He has the grace of God just as much as any of us do, yet he's continually suppressed the truth for so long, I don't think he hear anymore. And that very well may be a judgement against him at this point...
Actually Jesus was the first, John 6 and John 10 and then Paul picked it up.
@Kedrick Garland Speaking of Paul, why did Jesus ask him why he kicked against the pricks if grace is irresistible?
@@travissharon1536 he did not ask Paul why, he told Paul it is hard, it is working against you.
@@travissharon1536 Did he resist? Or not do it
Calvinism is true-when I understood each doctrine I felt saved and born all over again. I saw my inconsistencies as a “free-will” believing Christian. It’s just not true. God is the author and finisher of our faith. People reject these truths because they want to share in God’s glory in their salvation. No one chose Christ, He chose them. Period!
born again all over... Sounds like a possession of gnosticism. All sub cults the leech off the body of Christ give that feeling. If you can say Calvinism is the truth after hearing the arguments Steve made, it's out of my hands. I hope God leads you to serve his purpose for you.
@@travissharon1536 👍
Amen . Ther are no contradictions in the word and we shouldn't believe in them ether. Free will is a heresy crept in by Satan. Words free will are not in the word of God. Were Free to make choices .
I have to say again, Mr. Greg stated there’s nowhere in scripture that states Esau was rejected even though he wanted to repent to be saved. I don’t think he’s ever read Hebrews 12. 16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
17 For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears!
Amen
Again, Mr. Greg is trying to say that the potters the two vessels is two sections of Israel that all Paul’s talking about is Israel in Romans 9 , I think he needs to read at the end, 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
It says right here even US who is Paul’s referring to is he not talking to the Gentile church? Whom he has called not only all the Jews, but also of the Gentiles, so there goes his theory out the window. It wasn’t two lumps of Israel, separated as he’s trying to say.😮
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles
This debate is about God’s freedom and synergists limit that freedom by a completely unbiblical, illogical and absurd elevation of man’s autonomy. Why is it so hard for people to just accept that “free will” is not autonomous free will. Free will is the ability to freely choose what is in line with your nature, what you desire most and apart from God, no man chooses God? Why is that so hard to grasp when it is plastered all over scripture? Why is it so hard to understand that God ordains all that comes to pass and accomplishes those decrees by using the free choices of men? Biblical free will, not philosophical, humanistic and pagan versions of it. It always amazes me that even Christians desire so much to elevate their “autonomy” to heretical levels
It strikes me that James White never engages with Steve Gregg's actual points. If I made a flow chart of this debate, it would be James starting a whole ton of points, Steve responding to them, James making new points, Steve responding to them, and so on. In many cases, Steve makes his own points completely unanswered by James. It's a bit ridiculous, but not too surprising. Defenders of Calvinism tend to repeat their proof texts with little argument ad nauseum, but never respond to other explanations for them or explain passages that go against them.
Some are not given, by God, the gift of actually paying attention/LISTENING
Geez just listened to part 4 where Steve tried to ask Dr White some questions, which he didn’t really like. I see why he likes debates with a lot of rules he thinks it’s a chess game to try to dominate the other opponent. He not only wouldn’t answer his questions (because they are against his view) he accused Steve of things he’s (JW) clearly guilty of.
13:30 exactly! Augustine was NOT the first early church father to hold to a high view of God's soverignty.
God's sovereignty is seen very early, such as Clemens Romanus. A.D. 69, Epist. ad Corinth. 1:pgs. 64, 20, 30, 72, 78, 88, 114, 130 ...
as well as Barnabas. A.D. 70, Barnab. Ep. Far. 1, sect. 11. p. 224, par. 1, c. 6, p. 227, Part 1, s. 6, p. 224.
That’s not what most Calvinists claim, including John Calvin himself.
@Evan. I think that is misunderstood.. There wasn't a systematic view until Augustine. Probably because Christians were being murdered for the first two centuries that kind of stuff makes scholarly academic approaches somewhat difficult
It's not about God's sovereignty. Calvinists don't use the word right.
God has sovereignly inspired scripture. Calvinists try to take away God's sovereignty by changing His Word.
@@coryalbright9798🤣🤣🤣🤣. The people trying to hold to the original text in the original language are the ones changing definitions. Calvinist don't change change their view of sovereignty from one page to the next simply because our ego or feelings are hurt. God is sovereign to flood the entire world as equal as he is sovereign to call dead people to life without their belief being a prerequisite.
To think that we’re all just a bunch of robots wondering around hoping and praying that our name was thrown into the “saved” cookie jar instead of the “damned” jar at the beginning of the world is just hard to believe!
All that you're saying is you don't trust God to make salvific choices. You only trust yourself. Do you even trust in God?
Jesus' Word lol..... I sure do. I trust what the Bible says. I CHOOSE this day to serve the Lord. It’s sad to see people actually following a regular man instead of God. John Calvin is not gonna save anyone!! Sending my prayers!!!
It is and Calvinism teaches no such thing!
Ezekiel 36:27
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
I just need to add (I know I already commented here), but I noticed that parts 4 and 5 have the comments turned off. There are some folks on here who think that Dr. White was being harsh to Mr. Gregg. What you don’t seem to understand is that Mr. Gregg was using some very nasty debate tactics here, asking a question, letting Dr. White speak for all of a second or two, and then interrupted with more assertions and questions.
Dr. White very precisely pointed out the loaded nature of Mr. Gregg’s questions, and so Dr. White is under no obligation to answer questions based on faulty premises or asked with some bad faith motives. Mr. Gregg claimed that Dr. White’s questions were loaded as well, but did anyone notice that Dr. White did not interrupt Mr. Gregg? Dr. White asked his questions during his presentations and Mr. Gregg barely touched them.
If you can hear that interaction and think that Dr. White was in the wrong for his reaction then you need to re-assess how you view discussions/debate. Imagine having a friendly disagreement with someone (because up until that point the two men were fairly cordial and kind), and then the person you are talking to asks you questions. Then right as you get a few words into answering the question they butt in with “Well, what about this or that?” And then you try to answer and then “Oh but you are then saying this which isn’t true and” then you try to clarify and then “See everyone, he is reading into this text something that isn’t there.” All without giving you the courtesy of putting out more than a sentence or two before they rush in and thrust the sword once again.
My word, it seems like you guys don’t realize that most significant truths and thoughts take more than a quick 140 character snippet to answer…
Edit: And one last point to add - Mr. Gregg’s lack of theological education of any kind is very telling. Does Mr. Gregg regularly attend a church where the word of God is preached, exposited, taught, every week? It doesn’t even have to be a Calvinistic church. The way he makes certain statements, like “Oh, well Paul COULD be talking about all men being depraved based on Romans 1, but we don’t know. He doesn’t say, so we should lay that side,” just shows a fundamental ignorance of these things. He makes a lot of such statements, giving a “Well, we don’t know for sure that this is what was said or meant,” and then concludes that it CAN’T be that. That is not how serious theology is done.
One thing to add: in Matt 8:11, we do see Isaac was saved because he's listed as one of those with whom believers will feast in heaven.
Monergism and synergism are both true simultaneously.
Christ does give us freedom, undisputable. However what we do not realize if we backslide then we are not exercizing free will but putting ourselves under satans will that is ultimately under Gods will. So we see then that God is the only one with frre will. We just have a choice to make day by day. Maybe i am right or maybe I am wrong.
We are volitional creatures. God has given us minds and hearts, and He's given us wills. And we exercise that will all the time. We make choices every minute of the day, and we choose what we want. We choose freely. Nobody's coercing us, putting a gun to our head-we're not robots. Robots don't have minds. Robots don't have wills. Robots don't have hearts. We're human beings. We make choices.
That's why we're in trouble with God because the choices that we make in our fallen condition are sinful choices. We choose according to our desires which are only wicked continuously the Bible tells us. That we are as it were, dead in sin and trespasses even though biologically we're very much alive, and we're walking according to the course of this world-according to the Prince of the power of the air-fulfilling the lusts of the flesh is what the Bible tells us.
And so, the Bible makes it very clear that we are actively involved in making choices for which we are responsible, and which expose us to the judgment of God. And yet at the same time, the Bible teaches us that we're enslaved." We are not free from ourselves. We're not free from our own sinful inclinations, and our sinful appetites, and our sinful desires. We're slaves to our sinful impulses. That's what the Bible teaches us again, and again, and again. The humanist doctrine of free will, the pagan view of free will says that man is free not only from coercion, but man is free in the sense that his will is indifferent. It has no predisposition, or inclination, bias, or bent towards sin because the pagan and the humanist deny the radical character of the fall. But the Bible teaches us that we are fallen creatures who still choose and make decisions, but we make them in the context of our prison of sin. And the only way we can get out of that prison is if God sets us free.
James White accuses Steve Gregg of reading into the text.......Jesus said - No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:44, KJV) James White interprets this as 'No man can come to me except the Father draws him and the Father will only draw the elect and no one else. Even though Jesus said - And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. (John 12:32, KJV) So James White is the one reading into the text and using eisegesis, but to him it's ok as long as he's the one doing it. It's also really funny to listen to JW actually brag that an atheist agrees with his view on the bible like it's some great achievment.
So you are an universalist then? Because John 6:44 also says “and I will raise him up at the last day.” (KJV)
All whom the father draws are saved.
James White is not reading into the text, it’s obviously the elect that are in view here (elect = the ones that are saved).
@@stuestolen It doesn't say everyone the Father draws will come to him it just says no one can come without the Father drawing them. And Jesus said when He was lifted up He would draw all men. Of course Calvinsts will say that can't mean all because - calvinism. But all means all. People have free will and the ability to choose. I know Calvinists don't believe that but the Bible does - 'But as many as RECEIVED Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who BELIEVE in His name, (John 1:12, NASB) 'For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; (2 Corinthians 5:14, NASB)
@@keith3362
1) John 6 teaches that all whom the fathers draws will come.
You are wrong in asserting that people can be drawn by God, but not come (in the context of John 6).
First of all, the words “draw” and “give” are used as parallel expressions in John 6.
John 6:65 reads: “And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were GIVEN unto him of my Father.”
This points back to what Jesus said in verse 44, where the word “draw” is used, instead of “give”: “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me DRAW him: and I will raise him up at the last day”.
And as we see here, all whom are drawn, will be saved (raised on the last day).
If this wasn’t enough, Jesus also says explicitly in verse 37 that “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.”.
This passage clearly teaches that all whom the Father gives/draws, will come.
If you still think this is a mistaken interpretation, please explain why. I don’t understand how you could interpret it in any other way.
2) What does draw mean?
I think you are assuming a wrong meaning for the word “draw” in your interpretation. When we see how this Greek word is use other places in the bible, we understand that we’re not talking about mere influencing or inviting people to come. The same term is used to describe when people are dragged out of a place, dragged to a place or dragged to court (Acts 16:19; 21:30; James 2:6). The meaning of this word therefore doesn’t fit well with an arminian interpretation.
This of course makes sense in light of the biblical teaching of total depravity, that we are all in rebellion against God, and that no one seeks God in their natural state. That’s why God have to draw them, before they can come.
3) “But all means all”
When you say “all” means “all”, I assume you mean that the word “all” always refers to every single individual person. The only way to uphold this understanding is to be a universalist.
How do you interpret the word “all” in these verses:
1.Corintians 15:22 “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”
Will every single individual person be made alive with Christ? Or what about the verse you cited yourself: 2.Corinitans 5:14. Did every single individual person on earth die with Christ?
All in these verses obviously refer to the believers, not everyone without exception.
So, when Jesus says that he will draw all to himself, it cannot mean every single individual person, except if you interpret this as universalism.
4) John 1:12-13
Yes, every person who believes and receives Jesus, will be saved as John 1:12 says. But read verse 13 as well. It’s not because of their own will, but of Gods will. That’s also why it says that they were predestined to be his children (Ephesians 1:5). They were predestined to receive and believe.
Calvinists does believe that people have the ability to choose, but in our natural state we all chose sin instead of God. That’s why God first needs to draw us, before we can come. God makes the unwilling, willing. He gives us a new heart and a will, so we can choose him.
Philippian’s 2:13 “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”
In part 4, James White suddenly claims we must let all scripture speak together and never isolate a passage, and that he would never ask anyone else to do that. Rewind to the discussion of John 6 and we see that's a giant load of crap. "Rules for thee, but not for me."
So Mr. Greg seems to believe that God’s will is not always done. Has he ever read Isaiah 10:46? 9 Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. 10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, 'My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.
The primary problem I have with Calvinist, especially ones like James White, is this absolute belief they know everything about God and his plan of salvation. They refuse to offer any form of humility to say that they could be wrong about what they believe. The arrogance is asstonishing. It's almost narcissistic. They actually believe they have God all figured out.
Dr. White is always solid in his debates. So happy to hear him faithfully defend the truth! ❤️
Steve Gregg definitely has better arguments 👍🏽
Nah
No he doesn’t lol
But does the scripture say?
For God so loved the elect, he eternally dammed those who were created to burn in hell without the ability to make a choice. Dr. White 3:16 😔
Everyone can come to me and when they do the Father will give them me and I will raise them up on the last day, john 6:44, Steve Gregg...
@@Michael-uk3pj
John 17:6 ¶ I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: 👉🏻thine they were👈🏻, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
Steve says that the Father gave Jesus those that already belonged to Him. The faithful remnant were given to the Messiah they waited for. The rest were hardened.....
John 12:39 ¶ Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
And since Jesus came unto His own (only to the lost sheep of Israel) and wasn’t opening the kingdom up to the Gentiles until 3.5 years after His resurrection, then no man could come. Gentiles not yet allowed and Israel hardened. Only the faithful remnant of Israel who had learned from God’s teaching would come to Jesus.
So Steve just understands what was taking place at that time.
@@Michael-uk3pj He is patient with you, not wanting (the elect) anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. (Dr. White) 2 Pet 3:9
@@IglesiaMQV who is the "you" in that passage?
Is it absolutely everybody?
We are all deserved of danmation. That would be just. Saving the elect is grace. God is just and gracious he demonstrates all these attributes perfectly.
Again, Mr. Greg states that God doesn’t control the universe and his sovereign control. Why does he not believe this one scripture teaches differently! Daniel 4:35
All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?”
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased.
But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help.
This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit.
This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.".
:)
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
-Acts 3:19
.
Dr. White was the only one, up to this point at least (and given the pattern I have no reason to believe this will change in parts 4 or 5) that actually took a text and walked through the text verse by verse. He didn’t have to jump around to various other passages with different contexts and subject matters to read into the text at issue. Dr. White could walk through each text they were discussing, whether it was John 6, Eph. 1, or Rom. 9, from start to finish. Mr. Gregg could not (and did not up to this point) do that.
The main issue with Mr. Gregg’s theology, as made very clear in Part 4 of this discussion, is that his anthropology is far too high. He refuses to allow the entire testimony of Scripture speak about the absolute fallen nature of man, from birth, haters of God and slaves of sin. Mr. Gregg puts man on a higher pedestal than he should, and as a result he puts God’s sovereignty on a lower pedestal to compensate.
If one would read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John you would see that Jesus was a nutritionist and a nut case. Even his family knew it (
Mark 3:21)
Steve Gregg has it James white is arrogant and thinks he knows, but is not reading scripture in context.
Arrogance is believing that fallen humans can do anything to save themselves.
You reject these truths because you believe you played a part in your salvation. God is the one who grants grace, faith, and repentance, NOT YOU.
@@mrslisabaird truth Lisa
How do you read these scriptures?
John 10:28
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
John 6:37-39
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
You and Steve are wrong, and both should become a Christian. Right now you and Steve are clowns.
I would really love one scripture that actually states man has a free will to choose Jesus please can I have just one!
Are you looking for verse that says that letter for letter? There is none.
But plenty of verses that imply your choice to believe or not to believe.
How did you believe in Christ? Just it happened or you decided to believe?
@@SavedbyGrace-js8iz it just happened The Father was drawing me to Christ through the Holy Spirit convicts me of my sin granted me repentance and saving faith in Christ as I heard the gospel made me born again
Also, Jesus and all the apostles preached the sovereignty of God election and predestination so it was first taught by Christ himself!
CAlvinism is easily debunked with the simple fact that you can't have genuine love without freewill. That's common sense. Everything else stems from this point. Love is the highest moral good. The bible says the greatest commandment is to love God then others. Calvinists, from my pov, see true love as a weakness.
😂😂
What does love to have to do with it? God defines what love is not you. God is the Highest moral.
@@kedrickgarland5343 can you have genuine true love without the choice to love?
@@tyronebunyon7254 what does the scripture say? No love is more genuine than God.
@@kgar5String simply answer the question. Yes or no. Can you have true, real, genuine love without the choice to love?
Although I’m not a Baptist by any means Dr. white walked away with victory🍷🍞
I just cant understand how you'd come away with that opinion.
@@coryalbright9798
Because he’s biased.
@@evanu6579 fair enough
@@evanu6579 Maybe he actually read the verses in order and not try and prove something that is not even there.
Me and most of my "calvinist" friends only became that way after we read through the Bible beginning to end without jumping around.. Up til then I'd been anti Calvin.. And my experience is my friends experienced the same thing.
I wonder, if as a father, Steve, has any inclination to reject or deny any of his children when they displease him. I would doubt it though. Therefore, he seems to teach that he's a better lover of children than God is.
What? Parents disown children based on behavior. They usually don't want to, but it happens. What the heck are you talking about?
Gregg believes his faith saves him. Faith he believes comes before regeneration, from a natural, once born man. Nicodemus was instructed in John 3:3,7 that being born again by the will and grace of God alone as the ONLY means of being in the Way, the Truth, and the Life. The Lords Sheep will hear and be regenerated by the power of God through and BY the faith and works OF Jesus Christ. Faith is a work, a work of God by Christ for His Sheep.
Agree!!!
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:40, KJV) Seems like ‘believing on Him’ (Jesus who paid the price we couldn’t ) is it. He said every one which believes on Him, period. He didn’t say who I regenerate or make them believe in me. Faith is not counted as a work in salvation any more than accepting a million dollars from a person who gives it to you would be. You didn’t do anything to deserve it.
@@keith3362 There's only one way you "see" Him.
John 3:3,6-8
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot 👉see 👈the kingdom of God. [6] That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. [7] Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. [8] The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
@@keith3362 Faith is a work of God
@@keith3362 2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we are bound to give thanks alway 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:👈
Steve is good but totally wrong. Dr. White is presented a very good argument and more positive cases. God bless Dr.White.
White is obviously wrong, and I urge you to please dig into the bible and rethink your theology, you are in a very dangerous place!
Steve’s purpose is to condemn Calvinist perspective, haven’t seen one sermon of his defending Armenian perspective.
Maybe you should look. He has verse-by-verse teaching through the whole Bible, and it is excellent. Though, most non-Calvinists don’t feel the need to do sermons on their position because it’s not anything unique. It’s how everyone reads scripture unless they’ve been taught read into texts Calvinism by a Calvinist. It’s not very complicated.
Im not better by having faith i am better off and yes the good works are better because once in Christ they are no longer filthy rags and actually we get a crown of life for it which we give right back to Jesus and bow before him but we are better yes than our atheist neighbor because we submit we are humble and fear God that is better than being proud and not fearing God of course it is better and why does the bible talk about Good and evil men in Proverbs if there is no such thing and we are all equally evil as Total depravity demands but is NOT biblical
When the calvinist says the unbeliever is totally depraved they really mean he's singularly depraved. There's only one thing the calvinist believes the totally depraved man can't do - believe in Jesus. They won't admit this but it's true. A totally depraved man can be charitable, self sacrificial and kind...he just can't believe. Total depravity is unbiblical.
@@coryalbright9798 Luke 11:13.
@@Gettindirty187 ya the evil can give good gifts...thats kinda my point. Total depravity isn't Total depravity. Calvinism can be incoherent
So what you are saying is you will get in heaven based on your ability to abide, live correctly etc.?
Even if Steve’s misunderstanding of nations were true: God STILL prepared one **beforehand for destruction** . He still hasn’t proven his point. God still had the sovereign right to create a group for destruction. Well, wait…what about their “free will”?
I wonder which one of us is deceived. I clearly see Dr white simply ignoring every strong point Steve made.
Can you cite the verse that uses the phrase "prepared beforehand for destruction"?
Even though God only had a remnant that believed in Messiah under Old Covenant Israel, He still went forward and created the nation, knowing they were headed for destruction (70AD) for their unbelief. God used their failure to bring salvation, and a warning, to the Gentiles. If, at any time, they should choose to believe in Jesus, they will be grafted back in to God's Israel. The election is always upon a Jew, but they must believe.
Romans 11:20-23 KJV
Well; *_because of unbelief they were broken off,_* ...
[21] For *_if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee._*
[22] *_Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God:_* on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
[23] And *_they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in:_* for God is able to graff them in again.
Clemmens is not a Calvinist James White you are deluded Read his actual works Elect saying the word elect just makes you a bible believer God does Choose people the word elect just means CHOSEN and God chose people and the choosing sometimes usually actually has nothing to do with Justification
Maybe you should be in a circus.
I agree alot of calvinist have become calvinist because they have been trained to be calvinist,this is true growing up young in the faith trained to be reformed I only saw the bible one way never seeking to understand through the spirit,Spirit, theology always felt wrong and made me question if I was even chosen,sooner or later left it behind and learned more about the bible then I ever did under a reformed teacher,calvinisms trash heresy
I was never taught it. The Bible teaches it.
@@AllforOne_OneforAll1689 sure it does,just like the bible teaches people can fly 🤦
@@GThePreacher I guess now you wanna mock the bible. Why am I not surprised.
@@AllforOne_OneforAll1689 I don't mock the bible, you mock the bible with your lies I'm and ex calvinist and calvinism is trash
@@GThePreacher No you were mocking the bible. I let the bible speak for itself, I don't follow my own heart and human philosophy.
"Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,"
2 Timothy 1:8-9
Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
John 3:4-8
23:50 Dr. White gives a false interpretation of vessels of wrath fit for destruction:
Even though God only had a remnant that had faith in the coming Messiah's work on their behalf (through the shadows of Christ provided to Israel under the Law), He still went forward and created the nation, knowing that through THEIR own unbelief, they were destined to destruction (70AD). God used THEIR failure to bring salvation, and a warning, to the Gentiles. If, at any time, THEY should choose to believe in Jesus, they will be grafted back in to God's Israel, but THEY must choose to believe (otherwise the door to election and salvation would have been closed permanently, along with the hardening and blinding from God).
Romans 11:20-23 KJV
Well; *_because of unbelief they were broken off,_* ...
[21] For *_if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee._*
[22] *_Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God:_* on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
[23] And *_they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in:_* for God is able to graff them in again.
In Romans 9, Paul deals with the sovereignty of God in election, picturing God as a potter working with clay: “Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory?” (Romans 9:21-23). The vessels of wrath are contrasted with the vessels of mercy; one set is slated for destruction, and the other for glory.
Let’s take a quick review of the letter to the Romans: Paul highlights the need everyone has for God’s righteousness (Romans 1-3) and how God provided for humanity to have that righteousness by His grace through faith in Jesus Christ. This gift is available because of Jesus’ sacrifice at the cross (Romans 3-4). In Romans, Paul also describes the results for everyone who has received God’s grace (Romans 5-8) and provides evidence of God’s trustworthiness in how He provides salvation to Jews and Gentiles (Romans 9-11). Paul concludes his letter by outlining the responsibilities of believers to live righteously (Romans 12-16). In Romans 9:22 Paul mentions vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, reminding his readers that the story doesn’t end happily for everyone.
Even as he is challenging his readers to trust in God, Paul laments the fact that many of his fellow countrymen (Israelites) were unbelieving (Romans 9:1-5). Paul explains, however, that this sad state of affairs was not a failure of God or His Word (Romans 9:6). God had promised that Abraham’s descendants would be blessed but had chosen Abraham’s line through Isaac and then Jacob (Romans 9:7-13). Not everyone who would come from Abraham would be blessed through that specific promise. God had certainly promised blessing for all the families of the earth through Abraham’s specific descendant (Genesis 12:3b)-Jesus Christ-but the promises pertaining to a great and blessed nation would be for the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The question is whether God has the right to choose whom He will bless and how. If God is sovereign, then we should trust Him as the One who knows how to deliver us. But Paul introduces the idea in Romans 9:22 that there are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Not everyone will trust in Him, apparently.
If God has the right to choose who will be blessed and how, then some might question whether God is unjust by not ensuring the same outcome for everyone. Paul addresses this question in Romans 9:14-18, explaining that God has the right (as the Creator) to have mercy on whom He will have mercy and the right to harden whom He will harden (Romans 9:18). Paul cites God’s dealings with Pharaoh in Exodus as an example.
Paul then anticipates the question of how God can hold people accountable if, ultimately, He is making these kinds of choices (Romans 9:19). Rather than answer directly, Paul appeals to God’s sovereignty as the Creator and the owner of what He has created (Romans 9:20-21). Pottery doesn’t question the right of the potter to fashion it in a particular way. The potter has the right to fashion from the clay whatever he wants. Paul elaborates by asking a series of questions: what if God-who has the power to judge and exert His authority-was patient with vessels of wrath prepared for destruction (Romans 9:22)? Does God have the right to be patient? Or is He restricted in His ability to show mercy and patience? Clearly, God has that right with no restrictions.
Some have wrestled with Paul’s statement that there are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. Some have even concluded that he is teaching a doctrine often called double election-that God chooses who will not be saved in the same way He chooses who will be saved. But, like Paul said in 1 Corinthians 4:6, we should not go beyond what is written. We need to be careful about making inferences when a verse is not explicit.
In the case of the vessels of wrath, Paul raises a hypothetical-a “what if”-to remind readers that God has the right to make such choices if He so desires. But Paul stops short of asserting that God is making such choices. Paul’s point is that God has the right to have mercy on whom He chooses and harden whom He chooses (Romans 9:18), but that is different from asserting that God chooses some not to be saved. Paul isn’t addressing that question; he is making a point about God’s sovereign authority. Thus, if someone is not receiving a blessing because God didn’t promise him that blessing, neither God nor His Word has failed. If He is indeed the Creator, He has the right to bless whom He will, and He has the right to harden whom He will. If He is the Potter, how He deals with vessels of wrath prepared for destruction is His prerogative.
Then why did he blind Isreael?
@@kedrickgarland5343 the problem with your take is that Paul is clearly speaking to Jews and their believes surrounding Israel and the promises of the covenant - to read it instead as wholly a sermon on the doctrine salvation is to misread it entirely.
@@dankmartin6510 He is Cleary speaking to , but it is about salvation and be being born again and Jesus said other sheep I have that he must bring into the fold, to get into the fold you must be born again of his spirit. All of the new covenant is for the Jews, the Gentiles never had the old, how can they have a new. We were grafted in, how is that done?
@@kedrickgarland5343 Roman's 9 is addressing angry Jews who thought salvation was for them alone and Paul explained that they have no right to complain - trying to stretch that out into a 'doctrine' is misusing the text for presuppositions.
Jesus 💯 did what the Father commanded.
John 12
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, He gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that His commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
Ultimately, you can’t prove either position because you are not God. The resultant being (Us) exists on a different level than the Creator. What you can do as a responsible parent is use your own heart to decide the likelihood of God foreordaining every crime in the ghastly history of mankind, versus these tragedies being a result of God giving man a genuine portion of responsibility. Seemingly God would have the ability to create semi autonomous beings. If God is like the best parents on earth we could imagine, who are peace loving global citizens, would He be comfortable with his children being lost for eternity? Here we find the meaning of semi autonomous. Perhaps interdependent is a better description, or limited freewill. Calvinism does not make any sense from the perspective of parental heart or stack up to scripture that describes one man’s experience with the audible
voice of God. Note these words given to Jeremiah:
“They have turned their backs on me, not their faces; and although I taught them, taught them frequently, they have not listened so as to receive instruction. Instead they put their detestable idols in the house that bears my name, to defile it; and they built the high places for Ba‘al which are in the Ben-Hinnom Valley, to burn alive their sons and daughters to Molekh - something I did not order them to do, it never even entered my mind that they would do such an abominable thing - and thus they caused Y’hudah to sin.’ ~ Jeremiah
Notice what YAHOVAH God says: “something I did not order them to do, it never even entered my mind that they would do such an abominable thing.”
It is more important to encounter God than to walk with theology.
Or Jude 1:6-7
“And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority ‘they didn’t keep their proper positions of authority, they didn’t keep it, it wasn’t God who ordered them to abandon their positions of authority’ but abandoned their proper dwelling-these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.”
What I’m trying to get across is the significance of the portion of responsibility God gave to man. Did God want man to fall? No. Then why couldn’t God get what He wants? There are a few significant reasons, because Adam and Eve had to trust His instructions, in order to fulfill their portion of responsibility on their way to maturity. In the long run God gets what He wants because we simply cannot experience true joy and happiness for eternity without aligning to His eternal perspective, but we can prolong this conclusion through our own ignorance, pride or recalcitrance.
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased.
But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help.
This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit.
This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.".
.
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
-Acts 3:19
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
-Acts 3:19
.
Heretical prayer: O Mother of Perpetual Help, thou art the dispenser of all the gifts which God grants to us miserable sinners; and for this end He has made thee so powerful, so rich, and so bountiful, in order that thou mayest help us in our misery. Thou art the advocate of the most wretched and abandoned sinners who have recourse to thee: come to my aid, for I recommend myself to thee.
In thy hands I place my eternal salvation, and to thee I entrust my soul. Count me among thy most devoted servants; take me under thy protection, and it is enough for me. For, if thou protect me, I fear nothing; not from my sins, because thou wilt obtain for me the pardon of them; nor from the devils, because thou art more powerful than all hell together; nor even from Jesus, my judge, because by one prayer from thee He will be appeased.
But one thing I fear: that in the hour of temptation I may through negligence fail to have recourse to thee and thus perish miserably. Obtain for me, therefore, the pardon of my sins, love for Jesus, final perseverance, and the grace ever to have recourse to thee, O Mother of Perpetual Help.
This is a legit Roman Catholic prayer, look up "O Mother of Perpetual Help" if you want to know if it’s legit.
This is super heretical. This doctrine of invoking departed saints doesn’t seem just like "hey it’s like praying to a friend.".
:)
Part 3 and Steve finally gives a ‘brief’ positive case for his position… Then defaults once again to trying to poke holes in predestination. Armenian perspective is obviously biblically incorrect.
I fail to see how your conclusion follows from your premise, or how your premise is even sound. If someone is against a view that makes positive claims, is it so surprising that he argues against those claims? And, if he does so, does he not prove the opposite view in many cases? If I make a case showing limited atonement is not true, I have proven that unlimited atonement is true. Likewise, if I show that election is not unconditional, I have shown that it is conditional. If I make a case that total depravity is not true, I have proven my view regarding the nature of man. Insofar as these topics come up, he attempts to do all of these things. You can debate his arguments, but pretending like he doesn't make them is not helpful to anyone.
@@lordblarg He never proves the other side wrong, just attempts to punch holes in the argument; all the while poorly giving a defense of his position. Yet he's bent on his position, no matter what the scripture plainly states, example .. Rom 11 says, God is not done with the children of Israel; Steve says He is.
@@LifeandLifeMoreAbundantly, I'm not following you. I understood your first post as saying, "Steve is wrong because he attempts to refute another view rather than support his own." Did I misunderstand your first post?
@@lordblarg He’s not proving his position by trying to deconstruct the other side, as you suggest. And he has no solid arguments to defend his positions. Thus his goal is to try and discredit the other perspective, cast doubt; ‘Did God really say all Israel would be saved..or does that verse mean something else..?’.
@@LifeandLifeMoreAbundantly, "He’s not proving his position by trying to deconstruct the other side[.]" - Proving a position by deconstructing the other side is a perfectly valid way to prove one's position given the debate is over a binary. I don't understand how he didn't do this. I also don't understand one time where he tried to "cast doubt" rather than giving an alternative interpretation. He gave an alternative interpretation for John 6, Ephesians 1, Romans 1, Romans 8-9, Acts 13, etc... You can say you don't agree with his interpretation, but, again, to pretend like he didn't give one is not helpful to anyone, most importantly you.
Faith is not sufficient to save according to James White which is heresy Paul always says faith alone is the only way to be justified and draw near back to God and God will draw near to you that is a promise of God that faith will save you even a very small amount by the skin of our teeth some with no good works like the thief on the cross still justified without any sanctification because he had no time to grow in good works and that is ok in terms of destiny but not rewards is all Faith is so important but irrelevant to TULIP because it is grace alone by Grace alone LOL that is not biblical we are in a relationship w god 2 people not God loving himself like the Trinity God is not lonely but he does WANT and LOVE us
Calvinism does in fact believe in grace alone through faith alone. You don't understand calvinism or White if that's what you think. We believe that our faith is perfected by our works, as James 1 says, and that faith without works go nowhere (or is dead as James 1 also says).
You clearly don't understand
Of course we are saved by faith but faith is a gift of God Eph 2 8-10
It is God who grants repentance Acts 5:31 & 2 Timothy 2:25...
@@Michael-uk3pj
Calvinism claims that you’re saved to have faith. Faith isn’t the means of your salvation but the result. It’s grace that gives you access to faith. The bible says the opposite though.
@@evanu6579 Calvinism claims no such thing sir!!
Can you cite James White on that?
The difference is epistemology. Arminians like Steve start with man when it comes to their theology. That's why they are championing the "free will" of man rather than the sovereignty of God.
Calvinists start with God, hence, we champion His will over our will as revealed in the Scriptures.
Calvinism is merely a repeat of Augustinian Gnosticism, Stoic and Manichaeist teaching which the early church fathers rejected in writing, which is available for review.
Both (or better stated all of the major soteriological systems) start with the Bible. But they interpret many verses differently.
All of them believe in the sovereignty of God. They just define differently.
None of them believe man's will is stronger than God's will. Frewill is NOT a superpower.
Calvinist don't believe they are insulting the character of God.
All believe in predestination and foreknowledge. They just define and use them differently.
@@SpaceCadet4Jesus Where is your evidence for that? Be careful in accusing your fellow brothers and sisters of Christ. The Bible says,
"You shall not bear false witness..."
The ones who usually resort to accusing someone are the ones who cannot defend their worldviews in intellectual discourse.
@@dpcrn I agree!
Calvinism doesn't strip a man of his responsibilities. Certainly not! Yes, repentance and faith are necessary to be saved. Both Arminians and Calvinists believe in that. But where we differ is that Arminians stop at the man. Making man the final arbiter of his Christian faith. Calvinists don't do that. Because we are looking at it in the grand scheme of things where we can see God doing everything for man to be saved.
Repentance and faith are not innate to man but something that is alien to him. How do we know that? The Bible tells us so..."
"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God." - Heb. 12:2
Left on his own, man will never turn away from his sins and surrender to Christ. He'd rather go to hell before he does that.
It would take an act of the Triune God to make that happen. The Father needs to elect him, then Yeshua needed to die and be resurrected for him, and the Holy Spirit has to make him alive first and then bestowed his repentance and faith. So that when the gospel is preached to him, he would respond to it and bow down to his knees in grief and then will get up to follow the Lord Yeshua.
Salvation is all of God and none of us. The only thing we contribute to it is our sins that make it necessary.
Arminians do not fully understand that because their focus is on man and his free will.
Freewill in its truest definition is about being sovereign. There is only one being in the universe and beyond who truly is sovereign and that is Yahweh.
What man has is a creaturely will that is in bondage to sin. To say that man has a freewill therefore is to make him equal to God which is nothing short of a blasphemy.
@@songoku3046 I assumed this fact was common knowledge. The evidence is readily available, historically accurate and has been known since Calvin espoused Augustine's beliefs as his own. For a single scholarly treatise that examines a time-line of the written history get a copy of "The foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism by Dr. Ken Wilson, an Oxford scholar. His isn't the only book available, by far.
If you want a quick read with a list of references, look at "Augustinian-Calvinism" in Wikipedia. Thankfully, Wikipedia is reporting the facts without error and has a volume of references to boot.
I was called a Calvinist before I even knew what one was. The Lord taught me the value of truth and honesty before I even was born again. I don't believe that you can be saved simply through an intellectual understanding. I believe that,that is impossible. You MUST be born again,the intellectual understanding comes as part of the gift of salvation. The Lord doesn't give us a Spirit of error or confusion. If a person claims to be saved but either doesn't or refuses to understand the plain sovereignty of our All-Mighty Creator, I would suspect that they don't know God at all. To Deny that God The Father chose exactly who He would save before the foundation of the earth and to make Him subject to mans free will,not only diminishes God to be our subject , but elevates man over God. These debates are good for the believer but I have never seen the opposition change their minds. I agree with my brother James White and would love the opportunity one day to just sit and talk about...
Non calvinists don't believe intellectual understanding saves
Well, I've had fun. This has made me think and it has made me think about Scripture. Dude, doesn't get any better than that! God bless all of you guys in this discussion. My prayer for us is that we make every effort to add to our knowledge, self control; to self control, perseverance; to perseverance, godliness; to godliness, brotherly kindness (pray especially for me for the fruit of kindness); to brotherly kindness, love. As this is how we will become effective and productive in our knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. I know that we all want to experientially know Him more and to make Him known. Thank you for putting up with me. I may have to go for a while. Lot on my plate. I love you all. Please forgive me for any transgressions or misunderstandings.
Mr Gregg, Great points about King and Father and our response. Also, well given definition on sovereignty. We don't have to believe God sovereignly dictates every thought and molecule if he does not say he does.
It appears your saying God doesn't have to be all-knowing. That God can somehow be neutered so as to make God more human. Bahahahaha..... My God is loving, just, powerful, and in control of all things.
@@JesusWordApologetics knowing an action is not the same as causing it!
@@michaelksmith579 Please elaborate
@@JesusWordApologetics God is in full control, but that does not mean he dictates every thought and action man takes. He knows the future. He knows how every event will play out and what and when to intervene to accomplish His Will. It's very simple to understand.
James White is far more faithful to scripture than Steve Gregg. Love how he takes you verse by verse to keep it in context and drive his point home. Well done James!
Lies James snakes through lies and Steve sticks to christ and the word
Steven is so clear in his teaching and doesn’t throw logic out with his theology. Keep up the great teaching Mr Gregg. Love you brother.
By your statement, you imply that Dr. White does throw logic out when speaking his theology. Please explain in more detail.
@@JesusWordApologetics As with most Calvinists/Augustinians, they see all scripture through their doctrinal filter. That was obvious quite a few times throughout the 5 sessions. His belief goes in front of what he reads not the opposite way around. Gregg on the other hand reads and then interprets and establishes his beliefs.
The disagreements between the two sides (Monergism v Synergism) simply put, did God initiate faith in you, or not? Is faith a work of God or a work of man? Which is it?
Jesus' Word faith is not a work. But if you are asking did God Force me have faith, no. He gave me his word. When I hear his word I have the choice to believe. Nature itself testifies of God and I can choose to seek and believe. He determined the times and places I should live that IF I were to seek Him, He is near.
@@rickthomas5200 a work is defined as any activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result. Anything you do autonomously from God is a work by you. The whole notion of libertarian free-will is that your will prior to justification is autonomous from the effect or influence of God, otherwise, it wouldn't be libertarian. Also when you say "did God force me to have faith" then this would imply that you don't believe faith is a gift of God? Faith is a gift of the Lord to undeserving people such as you and me. It's the outworking of God’s electing grace and the atonement of Jesus for His own. Ephesians 2:8 confirms the truth that faith is ultimately a gift of God. “The gift of God” in the original Greek appears in the neuter grammatical form, which means that it refers back to both grace and faith earlier in the verse. Grace and faith are divine gifts, and our Father does not give them to all people.
Well I was given to Jesus supernaturally when i begged him to fill the void. I had to go through paranoid schizophrenia later in life, the scripture I held onto going through that was John 6:37-40. All those the father gives me will come to me. I will never cast you out. The will of God for the son is that he shall lose NONE of all those he has given him.
I didnt know about reformed theology for a long time but I knew I was given from the father to Jesus and elected with just that scripture as my proof and that I couldnt lose my salvation because it was ordained by God himself.
So you begged but if reformed theology is true then that begging was irrelevant because you'd be irresistibly graced and unconditionally elected. Reformed theology contradicts scripture. Calvinism is a bunch of cleverly worded philosophical arguments for why scripture isn't true.
@@coryalbright9798 I disagree. I dont believe either camp are heretics, and both are saved. The diversity of denominations and doctrines is a strength. If reformed theology is a problem for you, you can go to a more free will emphasis church.
@@shanemccausland958 free will is not at all my concern. Scriptural authority is. Free will is what the arminians and calvinists squabble about. As Christians, we just be concerned with what The Bible says. So when Paul says "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality;" and then the calvinist says "actually that's just the perceptive will of God, but He's unchangeably decreed that the Christians who commit fornication do so. " this contradicts scripture. When John says Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world the calvinist responds by saying that can't be true because Christ only died the calvinist version of the elect who will be gnosticly induced with faith at some point.
Calvinism is a denial of scripture. This can't be treated with kids gloves. They are perverting God's word.
@@coryalbright9798 Well reformed people believe that you are only able to overcome sins if empowered by the holy spirit. The will of God is the prescription and the application is by the spirit.
Only the elect will be saved in the end.
Do you believe God knows the future? Do you believe God is trying (and failing) with all his might to save the unsaved? Why or why not. These are important questions.
I feel that reformed and non reformed are two sides of the same coin, one just placing more emphasis on election and giving all the credit to God. The other placing emphasis on personal choice if you are saved or unsaved.
@@shanemccausland958 please hear me...the questions you are asking me are based on false dichotomies the calvinist set up to make opposing theology sound bad.
No one can overcome sins on there own. The Holy Spirit dwells in the believer helping him to overcome AFTER belief. I can't save myself that's why my only hope is to trust in the One who can. Faith is not some meritorious act. Faith is the access point God has set up for salvation.
You've heard the classic reformed argument of God trying and failing. I don't believe that. God's not trying to save anyone who doesn't believe. He will surely save all those who believe.
Calvinists don't even know what the atonement does. This is proved by the doctrine of limited atonement.
Reformed theology doesn't give all credit but rather gives all the blame to God The "reprobate" was literally created unable to believe which is the best excuse an unbeliever could gave. So in reformed theology Paul was wrong when he said the unbeliever is without excuse (all the double talk the calvinist uses to wiggle out of this just contradicts there beliefs) Bible believers give God all the credit. The Bible is clear, faith is not a work. In The Bible election is pretty much always to service and blessing. The calvinists have no idea about this though.
It's not 2 sides of one coin. Calvinists don't believe scripture. They are perverting Scripture.
Please stop buying into these false arguments from the james whites of the world. There's a reason no Christian believed this doctrine prior to a 5th century former gnostic.
There are many instances in the bible where God chooses (predestinates) people. If you're honest you won't be able to deny it. There are also instances in the bible where it indicates we are to choose God. However, is anyone saved apart from the Holy Spirit? I think the answer is of course no.
How were people of the OT saved before the Holy Spirit?
John 15:16 ESV
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
Steve gregg refuses to understand the explanations of the opposite side even when it is clear that his understanding is wrong.
Nah
If we are dead in tresspasses and sins then we cannot be born again by our own choice. We have no choice. Dead people do not come out of the grave by an excercise of their will.
Hard to figure out. Calvinists would believe although we're dead, like with Lazouas I God rebirths us with a new life n New eyes?
JCIL Its all they can do. You cannot do good without Life. That Life is the Spirit of God.
botchedonce What you are doing is equating spiritual death with physical death and this is wrong. If spiritual death meant people cant hear or think then God would not have instigated or created the scriptures so that people could hear and think. People dont have the power on their own to see the kingdom without being born again by the Spirit's power, but they can choose to submit.
@@heyman5525 incorrect. You cannot willingly submit unless God gives you power to submit. Submission opposes sin nature. You are powerless against sin unless Christ gives you freedom from it.
“So then it does not depend on the one who wills or the one who runs, but on God who has mercy.”
Romans 9:16
@@3liBrns Submission is not the exercising of some sort of supernatural power.
Ovious in their interpretation of romans 9 that steve gregg is inserting national service and national blessing to deny the true context. Paul is sorrowful because israel is not saved instead the gentiles got saved. mercy and wrath are salvation words not referring to service. In other words God didnt have i mind service but salvation of individuals and nations. God is free in His choices. this should end the long debate in favor of the true meaning of text. Most arguments against this truth are emotional not intellectual. im not a calvinist just a pauline that agrees with calvinist on their exegesis of romans 9. i think the context from romans 1 to 11 is about sin, salvation, sanctification, and sovereignty and not service which arminians inject in romans 9. How can you be so emotional against this ? because it offends human logic of fairness and interpretations based on traditions. God's sovereign free choices are understandably not palatable to humans. The arminian God of love is not just loving but sovereign just and rigteous in His choices.
The Calvinists see God as sovereign even if misguided humans claim that mercy for some and justice for the rest is unfair by their human standards. Arminians are trying to defend a God who really wants to save all humanity but lacks the ability to overcome the will of His creation. Which God is Biblical or even worthy of worship?
The question comes down to the extent of the atonement. Did Christ die to save everyone (universalism)? Did Christ die to save the elect (Calvinism)? Did Christ die to create a system of salvation that everyone can participate in, provided that they decide they want to (non-Calvinistic view)?
If you're being consistent and honest, only the Calvinistic view of the atonement holds that Christ died for sinners. The non-Calvinistic view (which is only consistent in universalism) teaches that Christ died to create a system of salvation. In effect, no one was really saved by the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. They are only saved when, after the fact, they choose by their own free will to participate in the salvation system. It's their decision that saves them, not Christ. And in this system you have to abandon God's love for his people. Because you're holding to the fact that God has created a system that he will not bend to save anyone. God's love is limited to those who take the first step.
I would also wonder if any one that hold's a non-Calvinistic view actually prays for the salvation of the lost. If so then why? You think God is done. He's already done his part and now it's up to the lost people to make their choice. He has no influence anymore. He's just sitting back and hoping people will chose wisely.
Scot McPresbo Amen.
+Scot McPresbo I've actually experienced a lot of times where the first step I was to take became a commitment in my heart prior to experiencing any grace to go forward. It was as though the power to accomplish what was necessary did not arrive until a heart set on obedience was arrived at. You know the eyes of the LORD roam to and fro throughout the whole earth to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose hearts are perfect towards Him." (ie. fully committed). It was like there was a struggle in me as virtually everything that I saw and felt said, "No don't do it!" But the moment that I made up my mind in full commitment towards obedience, it was like I entered a rest as I was taking the step. I think this is analogous to the children of Israel crossing the Rea Sea or the priests with the Ark crossing the Jordan. Hebrew tradition has it that the water parted only after their respective feet entered the swelling Jordan River. I find this consistency rather reassuring. Now I wouldn't say that a first step of faith is prerequisite to God's love. Just that you do not have "completed faith" until faith and actions unite to work together. James 2:22, "You see that his (Abraham's) faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he (Abraham) did." I will further say that though God loves you, you cannot please God without completed faith, Heb. 11:6.
+Charles Packwood I guess I'm confused when you say "I've actually experienced a lot of times where the first step I was to take........" Since we're discussing soteriology, then I have to assume you're saying that you've been "saved" or "made a profession of faith" many times. The discussion is not about every single act of obedience a believer will make. Furthermore, I believe you're allowing your experience to drive your theology. I certainly remember coming to faith in an Arminian church. Explained through their theological system, I was making the first step to enter into a "relationship with Christ." However, this isn't the picture given in scripture. In scripture we see over and over again that it is God that initiates the faith that causes a believer to repent. And not only does He initiate the faith, but He follows it through by providing the Spirit for sanctification and the completion of His good work. From start to finish, the Bible reveals that it is God who saves his people, not his people that save themselves. And I'm very thankful for that.
Right, I've had experiences since salvation where I've had to have a heart that was not waivering back and forth on the task at hand. Which is to say that I had to sacrifice what I saw and felt to be right and take a stand on the direction that was biblical. Once I made up my mind, and totally rolled my trust upon the Lord, the inner turmoil and vacillation left and I took the step. That's when I found peace and enabling grace. Not while I was vacillating. I've had at least two times that come to my mind. Two were both different in the sense of "the obedience that comes from faith". In one I was in Mexico with a church planting team. We had just arrived in Orintanyo (sp?) in Chihuahua. I discovered a park as I was walking to a find a place to pray. Been cramped up in the car with the others of the team; they all went to sleep in the national pastor's house. The park was like built like a large wagon wheel, with a central gazebo in the middle. I was about to sit down when I hear God say "Not there, Over there." So God directed me to sit in a particular place. I just obeyed 'cause there was no real sacrifice to this obedience. As I sat there I knew that someone was going to get saved. So I looked around. Nobody. It must have been siesta time or something. But a great way off, I saw two individuals crossing the street. And I asked God, "Lord is it them?" Nothing. So I opened my Bible and began to prayerfully read Romans. As I got to Romans 10, I heard someone say, "Ah, La Santa Biblia." Something like that. I looked up and there was the two guys. Man, I was excited. Then the guy looked down at the text and said like, "Romanos". I said, "Yes, Romanos". He then preceded to read real so in English as best he could. Kinda slow and torturous. When he got through vs. 10, I asked him quite excitedly and pointing at him, "You, you Jesus Christo in corasone." I think that I used every Spanish word that I knew in that span of time. He said, pointing to his heart, "No, no Jesus Christo." I leaped to my feet and said, "You must come with me." I lead them excitedly to the national pastors house and woke everyone up, telling them that these guys needed Jesus. They awoke rather slowly but eventually separated the two into two rooms and began telling them the gospel. They both gave their lives to Jesus and I later learned that they were worship leaders in the church. It seems that when I had met them they were drug dealers looking for people who wanted to buy drugs from them. I believe my setting in a particular spot told them that I was there looking for drugs from them. Praise God, for using me for such a wonderful task! I'd rather be used like that than anything else.
On a second instance, I experienced a great deal of angst just prior to my obedience. I was working at Central Texas Iron Works in Abilene, Tx. I basically welded the component parts of large steel beams together: flanges to the beam web portion. I got so good at welding that I could do pray and weld at the same time. One day I was praying and drawing a bead down and God told me to tell everyone about Him. I mean it was just a short thing He said, but I instantly knew a lot of the details. Like I knew that I was to do it in the upcoming break in the break room. Well, I got kinda nervous, cause I didn't know what to say, and talking to a bunch of iron workers at break wasn't what I had in mind, at all. I had been studying in the Word about the obedience that comes from faith: Abraham in James, Romans 1:5, etc. Anyway a great fear came on me that I would not obey God. I was afraid of what would happen to me at work and I was even more afraid of not obeying God. Either way I was afraid. And I was praying so very hard for strength and courage to obey. At the time my thinking was like 1 Peter 4:17, where there is "the family of God" and "those who do not obey the gospel of God." I wanted so bad to be in the former and not numbered in the later. So I prayed. When I get in the break room I sit down at my usual place and just looked down and occasionally look at the clock. Time was ticking away, and so was my opportunity for obedience. My only friend, an independent Baptist, was sitting next to me. And he asked me if I was alright. I was so serious and afraid. Anyway a few minutes prior to everyone leaving, I stood up without knowing what to say and I began to speak. I told them that God told me to share with them something, because for some reason they were not able to hear from Him. I told them that Jesus died for them and loved them and wanted to love them even more, if they just gave them a chance. I was crying and shaking. Then I sat down. The baptist brother was beaming at me and you could have heard a pin drop in that room. Quiet like I'd never experience. Some preacher's, I've learned since then, call it a "holy hush". Anyway, after that all I experience from everyone, it seemed like, was trouble and more trouble. I would ask God, "Lord why did you have me do that? Where is the fruit?"Nothing for about a month. Then one day, a relatively new employee was sweeping up the break room as I was leaving and he stops me. He asks me: "Charles do you know why you stood up on that day and said what you did?" I said, "Yeah, cause God told me to." He asked me the same thing like two more times, and all I could say was the same thing. Then he says, "Charles, the reason that you said what you did, is on that week my wife had left me and everything was going so wrong in my life. I was thinking of committing suicide. But when you said what you did, I knew that Jesus loved me. Now, I'm a Christian and am going to church." Man, I was over joyed. And I didn't care if all I got was trouble from everybody, cause God had used me to win a soul.... But there was a moment, when I was vacillating, in my microscopic Gethsemane, where I wanted a plan B, something anything. Until I made up my mind to obey. I trembled in my obedience with no idea of what to say. Well, praise God, I'm still here and I think that guy, Clint's brother, is still here. That company closed up after I left to go to school.
Grew up arminian, never heard them use the word "elect".
Election is to service and blessing. The calvinists misuse the term
@@coryalbright9798 that's not an Arminian view...
See 2 Thess: 2:13 and Acts 13:48
Arminianism teaches election to salvation but conditional not unconditional
Classical Arminian also teaches total depravity and the necessity of Grace for Salvation but that grace is prevenient not irresistible...
@Michael everyone believes grace is necessary for salvation. The calvinists and arminian just both share the sane false presupposition that the gospel being presented isn't enough.
@@coryalbright9798 I don't see any scripture to back that assertion up...
Or a response to 2 thess 2:13 & acts 13:48 which clearly state election to salvation...
@Michael acts 13, 48 most definitely does not support calvinistic election. The jews opposed themselves and did not consider themselves worthy for eternal life while the Gentiles did. That's the juxtaposition of the verses. The "appointed" is in the middle voice. It's an action done by man. Notice it does not say "appointed from before the foundation of the world by God."
Calvinism is a set of cleverly worded philosophical arguments for why scripture isn't true.
From the Calvinist vantage point of scripture God appears to be using his creation on a grande scale to entertain himself. He has a plan and no one has any say as to what happens anywhere along the way so as not to interfere with it in any way. If that is the case then it really doesn't matter what we believe or do because we are only going to do what God wants anyway. We are simply the players in a long running cosmological drama. If this is true then it also means that love is just an illusion because you can't have requited love unless you allow the other person the freedom to respond in love.
The bible says that God IS love. There is no iniquity found in Him. So either Calvinism is missing something or the bible is a sham. It seems to me that Calvinism is focusing so hard on the authoritative power of God that they are missing the most powerful attribute of God which is love/agape. All you have to do is look at the cross to see this. There is no greater love. God does not have to muscle his way to the top because he's already there. He doesn't have to prove how mighty he is or create beings to fail so that he can be given more glory somehow through the redemption of it. His creation alone testifies of his awesomeness. When he created the world it was very good. It didn't fail because he secretly decreed that it would fail so that he could send his Son to fix up the mess and look good. His plan was always to walk among us. It did not please him when Adam sinned. It broke his heart but because God not only loves but he is love, he is more than able to express his ultimate love for us which he did by sending his only Son. This is why it pleased him to do so. He wanted to express his love for creation which is the most powerful force on earth.
If you paid any attention in Scripture.Ephesians 2 tells us how salvation happens,begins, and shows us that we are DEAD in Sin.Can a Dead man come without God's help?...Verse 4 and 5 "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)God doesn't have to save anyone,but because of his GRACE and Mercy,he elected to save Many.If he wanted to save ALL (every person head for head,past,present and future),every single person would be going to heaven.Even if God only saved ONE,he would be righteous in doing so! and remember,God is also a God of Wrath and will punish the wicked.That is why we NEED A Saviour in Jesus Christ to save us from our sins and the Wrath of God.(Romans 5:8-9)
teemu1381 , Amen brother.
You ask how can a dead man come without Gods help. In the same way the prodigal son did. The father said his son was dead and came alive. The son came to his own senses. The Father didn’t go out and drag him back. Dead is obviously used in a figurative way in scripture and not to be taken completely literally.
You are right, God doesn’t have to save anyone but he wants to. He wants everyone saved because his intention from the very beginning was to be in a love relationship with his created beings. He sent his only Son to restore this relationship. There is no way to have a love relationship unless you allow the other person to love you back freely. God can’t force anyone to love him any more than you or I can. Therefore not everyone will be saved.
If God truly loves his creation the way that the bible says he does he would offer his love to everyone, not just a few. He would not only pick and force a few lucky people to spend eternity with him and condemn the rest to eternal torment and punishment. If God can somehow override a man’s will and still allow him freedom (not at all logically possible) then he would do it for all not just a few because he won't contradict his very nature which is agape. It is not just to require something of someone that they are incapable of doing and then punishing them (let alone for eternity) when they can’t comply. Calvinism’s definition of sovereignty and justice has to be wrong because it’s a logical impossibility. The worst thing about it makes God responsible for evil if he determines everything that happens. There is no way around that fact.
L Morter, My question to you is what does justified mean? My second question would be who justifies according to scripture?
The word justified (adj.) means, " *made right or just*," past participle adjective of justify (v.) "to show (something) to be just or right," from Latin iustificare "act justly toward, make just," from iustificus "dealing justly, righteous," from iustus "just" (adj.) + root of facere "to do," therefore "to afford justification," hence the meaning "to make exact."
Who justifies according to scripture? Romans 8:33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? *God is the one who justifies*"
Now looking at the chain of redemption in Romans 8:29-30, For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined *to become conformed to the image of His Son*, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; *and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.*
I feel that those who believe that they come to Christ are not completely wrong in their perception of events. The process of justification does have reciprocal interaction with the Spirit which appears to us that we are coming to Christ, but in all actuality we are being *conformed to the image of His Son.*
I'm not clear on what your point is. Sorry. Of course God is the one who justifies and it is by his grace through faith. Our transformation is a process that happens after we submit ourselves. In order to submit we must first humble ourselves. God gives grace to the humble. That is something that must be done freely or it is coercion and not grace.
The gospel is the power of God unto salvation, not election of individuals. Dr White consistently parks in Romans 8 and 9, and not in Romans 3 or the rest of Romans.
So, you are saying Romans is wrong? It is either God's word or it is not.
@@kedrickgarland5343 He wasn't saying that, he was saying that you have to take the whole of the Bible, and not lean on 6 proof texts that make God into the same demon that Muslims, and other cults worship. Calvinism makes God a liar, all the talk about choosing, is just filler?
@@travissharon1536 How many times does God have to say anything before you believe it? Either it is God's inspired word, or it isn't. Secondly throughout the scripture God talks about his Sovereignty.
Ezekiel 36:25-27 (Listen to who is talking and the doing)
25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
Ephesians 1:5-11
5 he predestined us2 for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
7 in him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight.
9 making known3 to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ.
10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,
Passages such as Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1:5-11 explicitly teach that God predestines some to salvation. God predestining who will be saved is based on His sovereignty, unchanging character (Malachi 3:6), foreknowledge (Romans 8:29, 11:2), love (Ephesians 1:4-5), and plan and pleasure (Ephesians 1:5). God’s desire is that all would be saved and come to repentance (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). He offers salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11), yet we know that not everyone will be saved. How this all works together can be debated, but predestination itself is absolutely a biblical teaching. Numerous other New Testament passages also refer to believers’ being chosen or elected to salvation (Matthew 24:22, 31; Mark 13:20, 27; Romans 8:33; 9:11; 11:5-7, 28; Ephesians 1:11; Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 1 Timothy 5:21; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1-2; 2:9; 2 Peter 1:10).
We have a free will in the sense that we are capable of making moral choices. Our decision-making is impacted by numerous factors, though: e.g., our sin nature, our upbringing, our intellect, our training/education, our biology, our psychology, etc. So human beings do not truly have a free will, as popularly defined. We have a will. We can make decisions. Biblically speaking, we have the responsibility to respond to what God has revealed to us, including His call to believe the gospel (John 1:12; 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9-10; Revelation 22:17). But, again, our will is not truly “free” because we have constraints that shape our decisions.
@@kedrickgarland5343 You are attaching augustinian presuppositions to those verses, and ignoring the greater context. I agree with every verse in the Bible.
Predestination does not mean God picked you from before the foundation of the earth.
It means God had the destination of those who believe in Christ ready from before the foundation of the earth.
You talk at me like I am unwilling to accept the word of God. In reality I am attempting to live my life according to the word of God.
I don't want to come off as self righteous, but only cults take proof texts out of context to serve their agenda, and destroy the unified message of scripture in the process.
@@kedrickgarland5343 Look into non-calvinist/ majority and historically orthodox interpretation of ephesians 1 and Romans 8. They DO NOT explicitly say that God picks some before the foundation of the earth to be saved.
I apologize for my rudeness. I just dont agree with the Calvinist position.
That's fine. But here's the problem. You believe in libertarianism (autonomous free-will). That man chooses Christ prior to any regeneration by God, hence autonomous from God's ability to change your heart. Therefore, you make yourself the progenitor of your own salvation. Now you can boast. Yet, scripture states otherwise; Ephesians 2:8-10, "For it is by grace you have been saved through faith, *and this not from yourselves; it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance as our way of life*."
I don't believe all Calvinist points. I believe no one can come to God unless He draws them. Once we are called, I believe we can either accept or reject the call. It would not be boastful because only God can baptize a person with the Holy Spirit. we can choose to serve Jesus, but not all that chose Jesus is born again. we may choose Jesus but we still are dependent on God to baptize us with the Holy Spirit, making us born again.
Jesus' Word your Ephesians quote us actually speaking of a Israel, so Israel is predestined but o my the remnant. Not literally gentiles, no where in the old testament shows a prophecy that the messiah will come for the literal gentiles, but the gentiles that believe will cleave to Israel, that's why there's 12 gates and foundations and not 13.
Have you read what Calvin wrote, not what others say about him? I encourage you to read Calvin.
@@kyles4633 You said we can accept or reject the call, the problem with that is that the sheep was given to Jesus (his bride), he is the one keeps the sheep not you. Jesus said "ALL which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
John 6:37-39
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Steve Gregg is the eisegesis master.
Arminian position holds that “God draws all people, and therefore all people are able to come.” Therefore, John 6:44 logically entails universalism. Let's look at both soteriological positions:
*The Arminian Position*
(1) No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44)
(2) The him (all people) is able to come to Me, and the Father draws him (all people). Holds from (1), (2)
*Therefore*
(3) Jesus will raise him (all people) up on the last day (universalism).
If all people are able to come and are drawn (i.e., if every „him‟ is able to come and every „him‟ is drawn), then every person (i.e., every „him‟) will be raised up on the last day. This is universalism. The Arminian will object by saying that Jesus only raises those who do come. That is to say, they want to understand the referent of him‟ as the one who actually comes. However, there is no mention of the one who actually comes in John 6:44.
The Calvinist, as does the Arminian, believes that all those drawn have the ability to come. The Calvinist, contra the Arminian, also believes that all who are drawn will necessarily come and will be raised up on the last day. Regarding those drawn, the
Calvinist believes that only the elect are drawn.
*Calvinist Position*
(1) [If he is able to come to Me, then the Father drew him], and I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44)
(2) He (all the elect) is able to come to Me, and the Father drew him (all the elect). Holds from (1), (2)
*Therefore*
(2) Jesus will raise all the elect up on the last day.
This conclusion is completely compatible with the Calvinist position. In a sense,the Father‟s drawing is a universal drawing. It is a universal drawing of the elect. That is to say, all of the elect will be drawn. The universal affirmative conclusion that the Father draws all the elect, and that all the elect will be raised up on the last day is articulated by Peter when he says, “The Lord is not slow about His promise…but is patient toward you, *not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance*.”
***** you should read Gregg's position on the afterlife. Have you read his book?
***** the atonement is certainly and absolutely universal, and no one goes to the lake of fire for sin, although they ARE sinners. What they go to hell for is rejection of Jesus Christ, which Jesus attested to, himself.
John 6 and the drawing pertains to the 11, not one human more, except the possibility of The Apostle Paul.
i already pot links to both the written and the video study on this fact of scripture. Those the father gives Jesus are none but the 11 and this is a prophetic message given by Jesus that was 100% fulfilled in the Garden.
buzzbbird, yet, John 12:32 states: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." We see in Romans 8:28-30, And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified."
The word "brethren" pertains to both male and female in the body of the church. So it begs the question: which of the apostles was a woman?
Your links were blocked as spam.
particular redemption is obvious... God knows whom He will be eternally in holy fellowship with for all of eternity... omniscience of the non-elect has ramifications... I just believe that the Augustinian view doesn't explain it correctly... the Semi-pelagian view is FAR worse and it is really not election or predestination at all. Universalism is heresy, demonic deception and a perversion of the gospel. It is EVIL. Plain and simple.
***** The convicting power of the Holy Spirit is actively working on the hearts of men. Even in creation declaring the glory of God, there would be no affect aside from the work of the Holy Spirit. The very fact that ALL men are without excuse, seems to indicate the ubiquitous working of God's Spirit. Thus men are continually either denying self-evident truth or acknowledging it; resulting in either a hardening or a softening of the heart. The fact that the Father draws an individual does not mean that he will submit to God. The fact that a person submits to God does mean that he was first drawn. Thus, there is no boasting from man.
I mean this guys a 'propheser' but he talks about God's free will and not man's..Like they are mutually exclusive. The honest take on Calvanism is that its nonesense..in the most literal form of the word.
Paul Stevenson, what is a 'propheser'??? Are you saying Dr. White professes God's free will and not man's? Yep. That would be the point. Romans 3:24, " *for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God*, being justified *as a gift* by His (the Father) grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus." Romans 3:24 would be in line with what is stated in Romans 8:29-31, "For those (elect) whom He (the Father) foreknew (foreknew asserts those He knew before time existed - asserts past tense knowledge), He (Father) also predestined (meaning "allotted," a past participle adjective from to give (v.) or gift; also with a noun sense of "fate") to become (come to be) conformed (from con- ‘together’ + formare ‘to form’) to the image (semblance or likeness) of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn (in your right of succession in the chain of redemption) among many (the majority of people) brethren (fellow elect); and these (the elect) whom He (Father) predestined (destine (elect) for a particular fate or purpose (particular election)), He (Father) also called (past tense to call or summon); and these (elect) whom (past tense action) He called (past tense to summon), He (Father) also justified (past tense to declare or make righteous in the sight of God); and these (elect) whom (past tense action) He justified, He also glorified (past tense decree of being translated into the glory of God). What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us (the elect), who (the non-elect) is against us?"
"For the wicked is reserved for the day of calamity; They will be led forth at the day of fury. "Who will confront him with his actions, And who will repay him for what he has done? Job 21:29-31 Also see Job 18:21, Proverbs 24:20, Proverbs 2:12, Proverbs 12:13....
Amyra Bynt Yhwh
Yes I agree with a lot of what you said. With that said I have brothers who are Calvanits and I love them a lot but I tend not to agree with their beliefs and the 5 points of Calvanism. 'Some' of them are quite aggresive, some (more mature and humble) are not..None of us have 'all' truth and its worthing having the humility to be mindful of that..we know in part (1st cor 13:9) but on the whole I dont think the bible teaches 5 point calvanism and it cna be an offensive doctrine actually and if you take it to its logical conclusion (as 'i' see it) it means 2 very different Gods-This is the ultimate problem with the doctrine I think. But nonethelss I have good brothers who are Calvanists and I think we all also need to be mindful of immaturity and unnecessary division. We are all vulnerable to Satan coming on here to these youtube forums and getting in to haughty 'pride' driven arguments and 'insults'-I am guilty of that and I am mindful of that and whether calvanists or 'non' Calvanists we agree on that we are Christs representatives and how important Love is amongst the bretheren. Difference in opinon is inevetable. I just dont subscribe to Calvanism and for those that do, well thats part of their walk and we'll let the lord lead as he will.
Paul Stevenson
I think what Calvanists 'miss' (as i u'stand them-And this can be a problem cos there are inconsistencies in not only their doctrine but how their doctrine impacts on their walk cos they are often like 'non calvanists' in that regard) is God's desire for 'R'ship' with mankind. They seem to me to have a doctrine that has a God who is a domineering control freak. Now I know I wouldnt ultimately get a lot of out of 'any' r'ship if it was 'my way or the high way' and 'making' someone love me. I dont believe at all this is the God revealed in Scripture..I may even go as far to say I may not be Christian or be in a r'ship with this God if I believed it was true of him-Apart from having one out of downright FEAR..I mean this is so not the God nailed to a cross saying 'Father forgive them' I do of course have a fear of God out of reverend 'respect' and recognising his authority but still these are 2 very different things. This idea of 'r'ship and wanting r'ship (and not domineering control freak) is what I perceive to be the reality of whatScripture reveals about God. And therefore its sad in my opinion that they hold to this 'other' view of God...as i see it God through the Holy Spirit in Scripture has incessantly 'repeated' the idea and the 'importance of 'relationship' and loyalty and love 'between' and this is alos mirrored in 'marriage' and family...So i must say I find it a 'strange' doctrine..
Yes God's Charachter is the issue really as I see things.
Amyra B. Actually Calvinism Presents God's character (nature) and Man's character (nature). We like to hear all this good stuff that God is a God of love, mercy and justice; and He is. But as soon as the finger is pointed back at us and our nature and what we deserve according to mans nature, the humanists philosophers jump up and down and say see, I am not a robot! I am not evil! If God was completely just we should all be damned to hell. The essence of Arminianism and its origins, Pelagianism denies original sin and man's natural, essential hatred of God
Steve says. Dr. White says we believe that Romans 9 means nations. We don't. We mean Isreal. (A NATION!!!!) UGH!!!
And then later... Yes there are two nation's. We're talking about nation's here. Inconsistency is a sure sign of a failed argument.
He knows, its a debating tactic. I am getting sick of this on both sides. I have had it with the dishonesty. They both know each side very well. They have been debating this topic for decades.
As James White has said many times, we are the judges. He and all of these guys are not trying to convince each other but us.
I just watch them for a couple of reasons. The most interesting reason is that after 30 plus years of watching Calvinism and Arminianism Debates, I am waiting for one to be won by an Arminianist. If you know of one please let me know.
Fat Mann, being that debates are quite subjective, I'm sure many Arminians would say that they win all the debates. While I, like you, have yet to see them win, somehow they are still the majority of what is called Christian, there must be a lot of goats sitting in church pews. Bias is a very strong motivator, as is emotion, for the synergist view, as is control, pride & fraternity.
Fuzzy Counsellor it's hard to find a winner in 2 doctrines that are unsound, but I think Steve eeked this one out and James White started with his childish antics when confronted.
G Checker, "James White started with his childish antics" could you give me a time on this video where this is occurring, just want to see what you mean. One other question: are you a molinist? because your position "2 doctrines that are unsound" is what they say. Thanks!
I started to think that brother Steve was non partisan and the only other non partisan that I knew was Dr. Brown. Then at the begining of this video he said that Calvinists don't believe that God has the freedom to be free. SMH That's nonsense. God is Law Giver, not Law taker.
My five point Calvinist Professor from my college who graduated a 5 Point, not 4 POINT from DTS.
God can do whatever He wants, PERIOD. If He wanted to He could have chose to save everyone, He didn't. We only believe He is what He is and does what He does because that is what Scripture teaches.
In my Sunday School class who are mostly Arminianists, I am teaching them a very controversial Biblical Worldview. To get the point across to "these Arminianists" I must ask them to listen to me. They must respect what I am going to say, so I am explaining to them why I won't teach Calvinism and Arminianism as if I were to teach it, I would only teach both sides fairly and let them decide. I know all the cheats on both sides. I went to an exceptional Bible College that had both Calvinists and Arminianists and only cared if you knew they systems but more important how to Study the Scriptures.
So I tell them what I would ask before I would ever teach them Calvinism and Arminaianism. This is the question. "Do you believe that God has that Freedom to choose some for heaven but not everyone?"
Not only do I and Calvinists believe this, I have met a small amount of Arminianists who do.
I have heard other biases in this episode. Get a grip. Perhaps you knew you were loosing. I have seen this in most of these debates.
The issue synergists (Arminian's) have is; If man is responsible for giving birth to some nebulas measure of faith, then how do synergists escape the notion of a works theology? If man is the progenitor of faith, and if by grace through faith we are saved, then man is the progenitor of his own salvation by his work. His work being faith. A 'work' being defined as an 'activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result.' This is plain and simple works salvation.
I'm not sure why you responded in that way. You're preaching to the choir. In fact I believe that the New Birth in John 3 is the only way you can see physically (some day) and spiritually (when you believe). In Ephesians 2:8,9 the gift is "salvation and faith". My only point was that Steve started to show his true colors in this video.
James White is also guilty of this too, I see his debates with Michael Brown, They both do the same debates over and over in different places so much, its like a show.
In the 90's I did some limo work at Newark Airport and would watch both sides of the family and friends feuds who were on Jerry Springer, Richard Bay and other shows like that. They would fly in from wherever their last show was. They weren't feuding then. They seemed pretty friendly. Its all a show.
I'm not saying that Michael Brown and James White shouldn't talk to one another or be friends, no, no, oh no. On the contrary, I commend them for their maturity. I don't like the fact that they know how each other feel about subjects and what they believe and act surprised many times.
Steve started out very honestly but I believe he got to comfortable and for ratings or just to win an argument he started to act like Calvinism was so wrong, it surprised him. Give me a break.
I don't know you, but I know that I have been studying this for over 35 years and know both sides well enough to know what each believes historically, traditionally and even the different variations today. When I was learning this in college, James White was already debating on Ankerberg about KJO. He's got a ten year head start on me and he is by far more capable in studying then I. So if I know this stuff, he should know it inside out.
Sorry for any confusion. Was simply expanding on the issues of synergism. Wasn't disagreeing with you.
God has the freedom to create whichever type of world He wants. I certainly believe God has the freedom to choose some for heaven but not everyone. I just don’t think the Bible teaches that he does. He has the freedom to give people free will and the ability to reject His grace. He also has the freedom to create a world where everyone goes to hell for His glory (however sending people to hell glorifies God). Calvinist shouldn’t be so quick to co-opt terms like freedom, sovereignty, and (doctrines of) grace- all Christians affirm these things. We differ on the details.
LOL, the clay, indeed, decides if God will make him a vessel of honor or not:
2Ti 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.
2Ti 2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
2Ti 2:21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
buzzbbird, 2 Tim 2:19-21, is talking about those in Christ. We see in 2 Tim 2:3-4, who Jesus is speaking of: "Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier." How could the autonomous free-will agent be enlisted if it is according to prevenient grace and the autonomous man to actuate that grace? Also, where do you get the notion that the reformed view denies man has free-will? We deny that you are the progenitor of your salvation. Very different then what your attempting to portray.
*****I think you are saying that someone has given the impression that they believe that grace is initiated by man. That is wrong, of course. But you can receive the grace of God in vain. This scripture is irrelevant if all of the elect will inevitably not receive the grace of God in vain. It would also be kind of foolish for Paul to beg, plead or urge them not to receive God's grace in vain, if as the elect that possibility were impossible. 2 Cor 6:1.
Jesus' Word, verse 21 is talking only about those in Christ? The dishonorable vessel is first mentioned and is in contrast with the honorable one. The honorable vessel is “set apart” or holy. If he is contrasting the honorable vessel as set apart and the dishonorable as not set apart, how can the dishonorable vessel be considered someone in Christ? You must be set apart to be in Christ, and it’s clear that there is a distinction made. The only way to become useful and set apart is to become a vessel of honor.
This also follows Paul’s thought when he just got done talking about Hymenaeus and Philetus departing from the truth, and then contrasting them with true believers that depart from iniquity (verse 19).
If we look at Romans 9-also alluding to Jeremiah 18-the vessel of dishonor is on the path to destruction. Certainly if we read these scriptures together we can’t come to the conclusion that the vessel of dishonor is a Christian.
I don’t think you have a biblical case that the vessels of dishonor are in Christ.
About 8 years ago the Bible started to make more sense to me thru Whole Biblical Historical Preaching. Before then scripture never made much sense to me. Example: In (Romans 10:9-10), if you confess with your mouth your save or (Matthew 10:32-33). But in (Matthew 7:21-23), Jesus says not everyone who calls me Lord' Lord'. That calls themselves a Christian are going to heaven, Why? Basically my or anyone confession is worthless now for they were never born again. It seems there's a big debate in difference in mixer in the Bible. In which views are biblical correct? I know it's important to read Bible verses in content and context in Historical time of events. It's the big debate that Calvinism believes in Regeneration first then Repentance second. Arminianism believes in Repentance first then Regeneration second. Which views are biblical correct? To the human mind it's impossible to know who are God's elect. But it makes perfect since to God and His will. People are always saying what if I am not one of God's elect? But what if you are? If God saves you or not, I will always put 100% of my trust in Jesus for my salvation and not myself. For I know about my depravity sinful nature I was born with and why it's by His grace (Eph. 2:8-9). And in (Romans 10) you need to read the whole book of Romans to understand what Apostle Paul was teaching. Public Confession was the evidence of confession by believing in the heart. The evidence of faith which is a free gift of God. And in (Matthew 10:32-33) is taking out of context and is abuse in churches today. Back up server Bible verses to (Matthew 10:17-25) you will notice the author is talking about someone who is already a believer. And Public confession is not the means of salvation but the evidence of salvation. Go to www.gotquestions.org called (Is Public Confession Necessary Salvation? (Romans 10:9-10)? I would like to add that most people don't want to go to hell. But many won't repent from their sinful lifestyle to be saved. So you might ask this question to (Is God Sovereign or do we have a free will)?
This is only sad because both points are wrong. People like to think that Calvinism and Arminianism are opposites when in fact they are the same view from different perspectives.
As far as you have explained that, I agree. That's often how I explain it as well. They are both true at the same time depending on perspective.
However, taken within, and limited to the classical definitions as layed out by both John Calvin and James Arminius, I side with Calvin
Both sides agree that God perfectly knows the future. Is the future knowledge something passive? God created and then reacted. Or is it flowing directly from his creative decree as God. I believe we have a will and choices, but those choices are flowing directly from the creative decree, and you cannot recieve the son unless God puts his spirit in you and it doesnt depend on human will or exertion, but rather God who has mercy.
Genesis 50:20 is very important scripture concerning this. You have one creature will action here, the selling of their brother into slavery. And you have two intentions. They intended this action for evil, while God intended it for good. In the end Gods goodness will be revealed in all things, and all evil intentions will be punished either by your own merit or by the blood of his cross.
An unconverted man can only choose a false god for himself,no matter what he "chooses" to name him.Anyone who claims that salvation depends on the man who wills and runs instead of Christ's life,death and resurrection,has another Gospel.Without God's regeneration of the heart first,no one can repent and believe in the Christ of the Bible.
+Tim Ballentine Did the Ninevites repent in such a way as to be accepted by God. Matthew 12:41ff - The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. The phrase "in the judgment" is interesting. I find it amazing that the presence of the "men of Nineveh" in such a court would be enough to condemn an entire generation. (What of the women, the children, the animals in sackcloth"... sorry I digress) **** At what point did the men of Nineveh experience "God's regeneration of the heart" before there repentance? ****
Charles Packwood Yes,their regeneration took place before their repentance Salvation has always taken place in the O.T.just as it did in the N.T.,by grace.God must take out one's heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh in order to repent and believe.A baby can only cry after it's birth and a dead sinner can only cry out to God after his new birth.It's the word of God that is spirit and life,so I would say that it's God who opens the ears and eyes to His word that brings spirit and new life to the dead sinner.Remember,God knows all of His people before they ever hear the Gospel(He also knows all of the goats by name as well ),He calls a thing a name in the beginning and whatever name God gives something they will become that thing in time.So God loved His Elect and called them His sheep before the creation of the world and everyone of them will become His sheep in time.Those in Ninevah,even while in the midst of gross sin were God's sheep,they already belonged to God even before God opened their hearts to believe what Jonah preached and that's how it was and is with every believer in Christ..
+Tim Ballentine ... Acts 10:30. Paul preaching to the men of Athens: "In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now He commands all people everywhere to repent." OK, Paul speaking for God (that would take either major faith or major presumption) states that God Almighty commands all people everywhere to repent. So either this is true or false. If true then does God commands everyone to have "God's regeneration of the heart" since it is a prerequisite to repentance. Then, if God knows that only the elect will respond does He command people who cannot respond, to respond? Then, either God's command does not carry the necessary power with it to enable obedience?!. OR God's command is unjust OR God's elect is "all people everywhere". If untrue then the Apostle Paul's doctrine of salvation at this time lacked the revelation of Calvin's or your tenants of salvation. Which casts a perplexing doubtful shadow upon a large majority of New Testament scripture; reaffirming what many silently affirm that John Calvin should have penned most of the New Testament.?.
+Tim Ballentine Unfortunately, we have Jonah's sermon in its entirety. Consisting of approximately 7 words. None of which alludes to salvation, a heart of flesh or stone, Jeremiah's text or Ezekiel's. We also have no record of Jonah having had printed any tracts or Bibles. Sometimes what is not said is deafening, but since it is Scripture it becomes of infinite importance. Also, no one has EVER, in either Testaments, utilized this same template in preaching.
+Tim Ballentine ... So they were saved by grace. At this point in time had Jesus' blood been applied to the altar in heaven, of which the one in Moses' time was a pattern and type? (cf Hebrews)