James White's Fallacies regarding "Synergism."
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- This is part one of Dr. Leighton Flowers rebuttal to Dr. James White's misrepresentation of Southern Baptist Traditionalism.
Dr. Leighton Flowers critiques White's recent Dividing Line Program in which White straw-man's "synergism." Dr. Flowers goes point by point through White's commentary to reveal the fallacies and answer the arguments.
In future broadcasts, Flowers will cover White's debate with Trent Horn and Michael Brown over the ability to lose one's salvation...so stay tuned.
Thank you once again Leighton for being the voice for all of us Traditionalist! May God continue to grow and bless your ministry.
Roman Catholics are traditionalist also. We’re not to be followers were to search the scripture.
Another brilliant exposition by Dr. Flowers deconstructing the fallaciousness of reformed theology’s demented apologetic!
@Mo Jo: He didn't call Dr. White demented, he called Reformed Theology demented.
Mo Jo --- Mr. White is demented because he has so invested himself in the contradictions that construct the lie of reformed theology his pride will never allow him to acknowledge truth. Apparently you didn’t watch the video. Everyone knows and agrees the GOD of the Bible draws men to HIMSELF. That isn’t the issue. The issue is how man is drawn to Christ, and it matters a great deal because in the Calvinist theoretical model man is a robot and his faith is a delusion/illusion, making his faith meaningless, which creates untold theistic philosophical problems; but in the traditional synergistic view man is *NOT* a robot, therefore, the synergists faith is genuine, i.e. not contrived, which gives it meaning.
In order for a Calvinist missionary to win souls they *MUST* adopt the traditional synergist Gospel message, which is what every missionary has always done, because no aboriginal or sinner on the street corner is *EVER* going to comprehend the demented apologetic of Calvinism’s fatalistic determinism as a faith!
Ergo, the Calvinist gospel is a contradiction within itself!
Comprende!
Oh my, so you actually are calling Dr. White demented. You make some valid points but personal attacks are never an option.
It is demented. Synergism is in the Bible, monergism is not.
At 21:45, White gives Flowers the stink eye for three minutes straight.
I laughed at that, too!
Eric Rogers it started at 15.00
BELIEF always comes first. Jesus pleaded with many to REPENT,why do that if your first regenerated-makes no sense. The Jailer asked what he must to to attain eternal life.Believe an once you do that with Trust in mind,you now are regenerated.
Regeneration is simply the new birth, but something must trigger belief. One does not just choose to believe, that is an impossibility. John Piper once said in a sermon something like this "you can't believe what you don't believe". That is a true statement. If Jesus did not open the blind man's eyes, he would not have been able to see and likewise there must be an act of God in opening the spiritually blind man's eyes to see. And when you see, you do believe. All of this happens in one simultaneous event called the New Birth.
I notice as I am searching out the issue of Calvinism vs. Arminianisim that Calvinist tend to be more prideful and snarky and show less grace and love. I highly respect RC Sprouls but was stunned when I saw him state that Jesus died because of hate! My spirit cringed and was not okay with that. Beyond that headline Sprouls noted it was hate for sin but scripture only speaks Christ dying because He loves us... this comment from Sprouls is a pattern I notice in the Calvinist camp. I believe the root is from a lack of love in their theology.
I wouldn't make the dichotomy between Arminian and calvernism because they are both stem from Augustine thought .
No one comes to Christ until God shines the light of the gospel into the heart.
Yes, but one has to answer the knock in their heart.
Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me....Revelation 3:20
Explaining to a Calvinist that being saved by faith (in that scripture teaches faith proceeds regeneration) through grace is not synergism...
is like...
explaining to people Christianity, believing in the trinity, isn’t polytheism...
It’s by grace through faith though, not by faith through grace? The order of the words is important and not interchangeable.
Great analogy!!! Thanks
Mind you, all Triniterians religions supposedly are under the same God yet they are all confused and at each other. This is one more reason I don't believe in the Trinity.
About the comment by both Dr. White and Dr. Flowers about there being different types of Synergist and Calvinist. White was refering to soteriological differences among Synergist, which can widely vary as to require different means to be saved. Some groups teach that to be saved: water baptism is needed, keeping sacraments, or that we must maintain our salvation to stay saved, or we can lose it. Calvinist are all in agreement when it comes to Soteriology; that being regeneration precedes faith, and those whom God has predestined will be saved. Where Calvinist differ is on other issues which are not crucial to being Reformed: infant vs adult baptism, full immersion or sprinkling baptism, forms of church goverment, etc...
James White is smart enough to know that he is misrepresenting Traditionalists. @3:40 - 5:30
4:29 God is self-sufficient. His choices don't need to rely on anything that He has created. You're trying to work backward: starting with man, then reasoning back to God. But the biblical line of reasoning is to reason first from God, then go to man. Our choices don't hinder God.
This was an excellent rebuttal, thank you for posting Leighton.
The “choice to repent” ?
Where do you see in scripture a choice to repent? When those under the preaching of the gospel are told in scripture “repent and believe” that isn’t a suggestion. That is a command.
Time and time and time again we see necessary miracles for any man to become an agent of the Lord. That doesn’t change just because Christ died? All were dead. None seek God. None would choose him. Dead men don’t choose anything? You were blind, deaf, hard of heart, stiff necked, in bondage to sin and serving the prince of the power of the air.... but in your view... you somehow “humbled yourself and repented”? If the spirit had to open your heart and make you able to hear the message that would convert you.... THATS NOT YOUR CHOICE. Faith and repentance are granted by the father.
The reality is that you, in your view, refuse to accept that you were completely incapable and dead in your trespasses. You refuse to give 100% of the glory to God...
A command you have the option to obey or not
White is a professional *debater*--a *sophist*--period! He is desperate for Calvinism to be true in order to save face for decades of being a Calvinist. White should humble himself and admit that Calvinism is garbage, biblically and philosophically.
@@matt_h_27 You seem to be suggesting that no one on earth actually was positively affected by the Gospel until Reformed Theology. How is that making an idol out of human doctrine. YES, I think there were actual Christians around during ALL time periods whose salvation was not attached to their Human Institution.. In fact I would say that No One's salvation through Jesus Christ is attached to any human institutions.. be it the Vatican or Reformed Churches.
Tjel 81 I guess the fact the first 300-400 years ALL the church fathers believed in free will doesn’t mean anything to you? Only the last 500 years matter...
Here's what I am hearing in Dr. Flower's soteriology: God chose us because we first chose him.
Brad InFL No.
Here’s what I am hearing in John Calvin’s soteriology; the Calvinist god preordained to predestine a random handful of mindless robots to be his elect, then he impersonally discriminated against billions of innocent unborn people and whimsically preordained to predestine them to Hell because they behave and believe exactly the way he sovereignly created them to be!
A_Berean_One I actually have Christ's words in mind:
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.
John 15:16 ESV
John Q. Public God "discriminated" against billions of "innocents" who would spend every day of their lives hating him, John Q. Public.
Predestination is a biblical doctrine. Your argument isn't with Calvin, but the Word of God.
God's judgement of sinful man is just.
Brad --- The sovereign Calvinist god decreed to preordain to predestine the un-elect to be totally depraved, to have evil natures, to never be able to love him and yes even to hate him. Ergo, the Calvinist god discriminates against, and barbeques in HELL, billions of innocent people for being *EXACTLY* the way he predestined them to be.
The Calvinists gods barbequing of billions of innocent people makes him a sadistic monster!
Predestination is biblical, the problem is, the Calvinist definition of predestination is *UNBIBLICAL!*
It seems like Calvinists feel like they have to lower man to raise up God. I dont believe God needs any help with being who He is which is the most high
Riiight which is why synergism is false
@@JP-ul7tp Is that an argument?
The point of contention is what is God's roll in salvation.
In the view of synergists, God's roll is accomplishing the opening of a door, the breaking down of a barrier. The human must choose (outside of God's decree, somehow..) to walk through the door, and ONLY THEN is their salvation. Therefore, God didn't accomplish salvation, He accomplished, if you will, a part of salvation and man accomplishes the other part of salvation. That's why you guys are synergists.
In the view of the monergists, God accomplishes full salvation and it's done on the cross and that's why we are called monergists.
If someone puts a sign in a shop window saying." Job available , ask inside " , does this mean he has caused the position to be available ?
Also ' full salvation on the cross ' . Are you not missing the other important part , the resurrection? You were not ' in Christ ' when Jesus died on the cross ' , and you were definitely not ' in Christ ' before creation. Your only in Christ ( in time ) when you are placed in christ by the work of the Holy spirit . Which only happens when you believe , then your sealed by the Holy spirit until the day of redemption. Adoption is the receiving the new body .
I don't see How God can save me with our my participation and me with free will
I suspect, "Everything I do is the result of His grace..." means Dr. White only does good as a believer because the Lord was gracious in changing his heart from stone to flesh - not that His grace is what determines his level of success in sanctification making him better or worse than Michael Brown - but I think you know that.
Its seems to me that more than 40,000 Christian denominations and uncountable doctrinal differences between them (such as presented here) is an indictment on the inspiration and editorial oversight of the New Testament. A 2nd edition with greater clarity would not go amiss!
Very good, eye opening.... as always!
writing a research paper on whether or not judicial hardening can provide a consistent interpretation of Ro. 9! #NOBTSLIFE
Did you hear the Gospel? You will say yes. Well if you believe in Sola Fide, then NO, you did not hear the gospel because there is only one gospel, one faith, one Baptism, one Lord, one God.
This is why I asked you the same question James asks all Christians: James: 2:14, can faith alone save you? The answer is right there is the following passages. James even gives us supporting evidence before given us the answer to James 2:14. What is that answer? Which one of these is the Biblical and Theological answer?
👉You see that a man IS JUSTIFIED by Faith Alone. 👈
👉You see that a man IS JUSTIFIED by works and NOT by FAITH Alone.👈
There is only one answer to the Thesis Question.
It really is that simple.
@@m4641 Yes, it is that simple:
James 2:24 RSV
You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
This comment section is quite sad, so much hate.
..and so little understanding.
And ignorance
Another thing, regarding regeneration/justification, Dr. White has clearly made the distinction between everyone born into sin, inherited from Adam, with a predisposition to rebel against God and those who have been changed internally by God with a new predisposition to obey Him. The former don't, and the latter do, have the capacity to act on their desire to repent and believe.
Stephen Hagan --- Which proves the case that the sovereign Calvinist god decreed to preordain to predestine the un-elect to be totally depraved, to have evil natures, to never be able to love him and yes even to hate him. Ergo, the Calvinist god irrationally hates and discriminates against, and barbeques in HELL, billions of innocent people for being *EXACTLY* the way he decreed to preordain to predestined them to be.
The sovereign Calvinists gods impersonal discrimination resulting in the whimsical barbequing of billions of innocent people makes him a merciless and unjust sadistic monster of mindless robots!
John Q. Public Where do you see this in scripture?
James White deals with this video in today's DL
Fred Flintstone can you link it please? Because I looked and can't find it.
the reason why I believe in Augustine is because of this one statement . if you chose to be saved by God and our neighbor does. not ?? why? ...
Synergists reject penal substitutionary atonement, pretty bad
Calvinists paint the GOD of the Bible as an impersonal, whimsical, unjust, merciless, hateful, discriminatory, selfish, sadistic, monster of mindless robots. And that is really bad!
John Q. Public you have no clue what your talking about, even worse
We can find out who is right by performing an autopsy on Calvinism if you brave enough.
John Q. Public I already know
The *FACT* is, you are to frightened you might find out what you believe is gobbledygook!
Dr. Flowers why choose the word "Arbitrary" over Sovereignly when it comes to God's work of salvation and His creatures? A changing of the word clearly alters the landscape; thus avoid and supplant the correct word.... the correct manner.
because the word "sovereign" is never actually found in the bible. it's added in there by modern versions, it's not ever in the greek or hebrew. and the word sovereign simply means "total power and authority" ... it DOES NOT mean controlling every single thing that ever happens.
@@matt_h_27 God determining some things does not mean all things are determined.
@@matt_h_27 '
cause (something) to occur in a particular way or to have a particular nature.'
@@matt_h_27 My point would be less on the philosophy and more on how the bible reveals how God has chosen to do things . I cannot get from the bible ( without a presopposition) That man is totally unable to respond to the Gospel message , regeneration preceding faith and any individual being chosen for salvation before the foundation of the world . These ideas are not coming from the bible but from Augustine.
@@matt_h_27 do you believe regeneration precedes faith?
I agree with you buddy, but I'm still begging the question. If predestination not the way. Then what do they mean by it, because! It's in the scripture's???
James White's ONLY argument strategy against non-calvinistic positions is STRAWMEN! It's unbelievable and infuriating! Any the fact that he fools ANYONE with it is absolutely embarrassing for me as a Christian, that other Christians don't see what he does EVERY time he engages in this debate.
Yes but. At least he has the courage to debate. I don't agree with him but you don't see John MacArthur or John Piper on stage unless they're monaloguing.
I respect James White for his willingness to defend his position.
That tends to be how Calvinists argue against non calvinists
It is not whether God saves or not; it is whether the person repents and then asked to get saved; YOU CANNOT GET SAVED WITHOUT ASKING FOR IT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! JESUS SAID ASK AND IT WILL BE GIVEN TO YOU!!! THAT GOES FOR SALVATION
and when did the synergist adopt the " traditionalist ". tag. ?
How is it that all these Calvinists know they are among the elect? If it's purely God's choice who to save then no one can really know if they are in that company. It's simply a toss-up since god chooses people to save without any merit or without their needing to avail themselves of Jesus' sacrifice and payment for their sins. Why don't we hear from some Calvinists who are willing to say, "I'm among the damned." Or, failing that, why do none say, "I have no idea who God will save and who he will damn."?
The Bible tells us how we can know we are saved. You might want to open up yours
OF course GOD is sovereign in Salvation,almost ALL Christians believe that. Question really is Does GOD save according to His Gospel that he laid out.ALL thru Scripture i see SALAVATION comes by hearing Gods Gospel, believing and Trusting in CHRIST the Savior of the World.
Yes, everyone with a brain knows that God "could" have saved us Calvinistically. The bible simple shows that He chose not to do so, and prideful Calvinists think that is a weak choice by God.
in the beginning looks like adam and eve sinned againt God and then God makes a sacrifice for their sins but in his foreknowledge is stated that christ died before the creation of the world.God acts first and then man acts upon Gods gracious decicions. Faifth comes after the word,the gospel,the sacrifice of jesus.not before.
But in the end man has to choose salvation and recognized he is a sinner in the beginner God provided but adam did not recognize he blames eve .eve blames the serpent. And end up out of eden.
It is remarkable to me how Leighton is able to bury his core belief (that man muster some power to save himself) in a mountain of words.
It boils down to this: does God save 100%, or must humans exercise power to help God save them?
"But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH nor OF THE WILL OF MAN, but of God." John 1:12
Notice what came first. They that received Him and believed in Him. It was definitely God's will to save them by his grace, but they had to be willing to receive him and his gift of grace by faith before they could ever be given the power or the right to become the sons of God.
You said it,thanks! "Those who believed in his name,he gave the right to become children of God" Belief came first, thanks for pointing this out! We don't believe that we "muster power" God has all the power, or save ourselves! God gives us the choice to be saved or not! Big difference!Typical Calvivistic misrepresentation of others and scripture!
Try watching some more vids, you just might get it! Ar least you'll have a better understanding of what our belief actually is!
I think James White has more debates online than any other pastor\theologians. So yeah he has depth to his arguments.
That's a fallacy. That's like saying "a lot of people agree with him, so he must know what he's talking about."
@@Emper0rH0rde Not what I meant, more that you can find hours of debate footage of him and his side of the argument.
Dr. Flowers, are you not describing determinism, only of a different color? God allows libertarian free choice and He can always gets his way in spite of our decisions.
My question is, since God chooses to not win every soul even though He could regardless of our choices, isn’t He really then, determining life and death through his choice of letting some remain lost; And he is free to do so because he is the potter and we’re the clay?
I’m missing something, because why then would he wish for all to be saved? If He did, they would be.
🤯
GOD gives SALVATION, no one can earn it. God throws ALL men a life preserver (jesus) so you can grab on or not. So God tells us when we grab on and REPENT with Trust we ARE Saved. Faith which is not a work comes by HEARING. The Jews were the ones who GOD elected to bring the Good News to ALL, Then The great commission, if this is not true an calvanism is true than the whole thing is a Sham. God does not Send people to HELL. people send themselves there buy rejecting GODS Mercy in his SON Jesus. simple an to the point!!
10:30 this is just more proof that you're mistaking God's free will/sovereignty as only equal to man's. God is capable of being sovereign (in character and in practice, without any limiting qualifiers) WITHOUT a deterministic creation. I've watched a few debates by James on this topic, and he DOESN'T believe creation is deterministic (as the definition holds). Now YOU are strawmaning.
Poor John White with his fake degrees, and no genuine arguments, and no fruit of the Spirit....yikes, he is hard to watch
But tho I believe I have to say,,I DOl,,I couldn't do that without Grace opened my eyes to believe Grace paced me in a spot and time with my meas😅ure of faith God Holy spirit drawing me to my knees, Then God gives me the opportunity to say father I believe Jesus satisfied you on my sin debt on the cross then I do what Jesus says I believe in my heart
and I confess 😅with my mouth the Lord Jesus Christ as😅my savior Lord and King , now I'm a reborn child of God, my spirit is alive my old body will continue decay as I await the adoption to take place in my new body Praise God
LOL...Calvanism was founded on synergism.🤣
Scripture is crystal clear God provided atonement for sin through Jesus (Romans 5:8-19), but one must exercise BELIEVE IN THE HEART in that gift in order to be saved. Jehovah made provision through Jesus for our inherited sin passed on from Adam, but we need to set our hearts in that appropriation and walk in the newness Christ set for us.
It's not rocket science.
Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me....Revelation 3:20
"if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and BELIEVE IN YOUR HEART that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the HEART one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved."..Romans 10:9
I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not BELIEVE that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”...John 8:24
But many who heard the message believed; so the number of men who BELIEVED grew to about five thousand.....Acts 4:4
When he had gone indoors, the blind men came to him, and he asked them, “Do you BELIEVE that I am able to do this?” “Yes, Lord,” they replied....Mathew 9:28
And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must BELIEVE that he exists and that he rewards those who EARNESTLY SEEK him.....Hebrews 11:16
For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the OBEDIENCE of the one man the many WILL BE made righteous....Romans 5:19
Notice carefully Romans 5:19 says WILL BE MADE righteous. It does not say WERE MADE RIGHTEOUS......That is because one needs to BELIEVE in Christ atonement. One CANT be made righteous if One Rejects that atonement. That's why Romans 5:19 says WILL BE made righteous. A condition exists on our part. Jehovah and Jesus already did their part, men needs to make a decision.
Think about it. Why do you think Satan fights tooth n nail to convince people not to believe there is a God? But even when he fails to do that for some, he tries his best to rob us of that belief? And finally when he can't convince some that there is no God and fails to rob us of the belief in the atonement, he persecute us?
For it is written in Revelation 12:17
Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring-those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.
I feel bad for Calvanists. I really do. They have been indoctrinated into a belief that in large parts contradicts the simple gospel. I pray they can apply better discernment in understanding and interpreting scripture. Like Paul said of the Jews, They have a zeal for God, but not according to accurate knowledge (Romans 10:2). It is God's desire that all come to an accurate knowledge of the Truth.
I don't understand how you can't see the issue with the concept of God creating other Gods. There can only be one God. If we have aseity and libertarian free will, God can't be God. I'm not sure how you make this idea philosophically possible?
@@brianbachinger6357 If we make decisions totally outside outside of God's will, then we need aseity, and we would be categorically equal to God, which means God is not infinite. It also means that there would need to be a greater power to mediate the boundaries of that category, and God would be bound by something other than Himself.
I saw a video by James white where he was talking about John 3:16. It was in reference to him saying basically that "whosoever" doesn't mean whosoever (kind of like what the meaning of the word "is", is). Instead, he said the emphasis is on the word "believes".
He really wasn't making a good case for Calvinism and took a good 20 minutes to play word games and over explain in a complicated way, that whosoever means a group that believes. OK, fine, but that's common knowledge and that's what the text says. I don't think any (true) believer thinks that people who don't believe are saved. So why the argument? Is it just a matter of wanting to be disagreeable?
If predestined salvation by God has already decided who, even if one believes, where is the guarantee that the individual is one of the elect? So what is he arguing about?
In Acts 16:30, the jailer asked what must he do to be saved. Paul and Silas answered, believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved. So, was the jailer in the "whosoever" group (elect)? How does he know? Why didn't Paul and Silas answer that if you are elect, you are already saved?
I don't understand what White was getting at in his very loud and spirited theological spanking that he was dishing out. John 3:16 is a pretty simple verse to understand and if we have to be a theological genius, dissect every letter of every word to understand simple truths and learn to be a professional debater to argue just for the sake of arguing, then there's no hope for most of us.
GOD could do all what calvanists say,but does HE do what calvanists Think he Does. i think calvanists think they KNOW Gods mind and Will.Basically thier Raising GOD to areas that might not be what God has Allowed or Determined. And i agree with and Dr Flowers an scripture over and over disagrees with calvanism ,especially the L in tulip,which imho is Dreadful and Terrible which was Calvains own words.That tells me something is wrong with high calvanism!!
God already did His part now we have to come to Jesus and repent and ask Jesus to save us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why don't you like the word "Synergist"? I don't consider it offensive. I don't mind identifying as a Synergist.
The point of contention is man's will vs. God's.
No it isn't. This is, and always has been, a discussion on what God wants and what He's doing to those ends. We always play by his rules and his plan is always maximally glorious and complete.
Sorry, Leighton, you're the one with the false dichotomy - clearly you've switched categories. Dr. White was speaking of God's monergistic work of regeneration and justification where you go off to describe the differences between believers working-out their own salvation in sanctification i.e. yourself and Michael Brown vs Dr. White. Is there synergism between the Lord and the believer pre-glory? That's another topic, but I would say yes.
Stephen Hagan If you have cancer, and someone offers you the cure to cancer, and you willingly accept it, you have not in any way saved yourself. You can take no credit whatsoever. That is Flowers' point.
White is saying that the person who gave you the cure didn't actually save your life, they only made it possible. That's complete nonsense.
Daniel Cartwright amen.
HI Stephen, how does that line up with Calvinism??. You cant have a before and after doctrine,, under meticulous determinism of your will, or God decreeing what you will choose or work out. For you there is no working out your own salvation,, If you sinned yesterday, you as Calvinist would have to,, instead of repenting,, say that God decreed and secretly willed for you to sin. You cant be Calvinist before you are born again,, then switch to traditionalism, so shutting the door of salvation for the world . Either God decreed for you to sin as a Christian or an unbeliever, under Calvin, what is the difference, if God is riding your will like a beast as he wishes, Either he does it through you, compels you to sin as a Christian and an unbeliever or he doesn't want sin in any way, you cant have both, it is you who are a bit confused here. I am not quite sure of your stance here
I missed that. I guess Luther was a "traditionalist
If you believe God especially chose you over other people for some arbitrary reason you end up as arrogant and snarky as James White. Sad how so much education can blind you severely. Calvinism is Gnosticism on steroids. They combine the “good god” and the “bad god” into one Calvinist god. Who is not the God of Israel. Calvinists have made a god in their own image.
I’m a 0 point Calvinist
4:10 - _"I think you can look up the word "arbitrary" and it fits what Calvinism is. Arbitrary means making a choice without regard to anybody else. It's making a choice all on your own.":_
Sure, lets look it up. These are the top definitions, and will be the first thing most people will assume you mean:
Oxford - based on *random* choice or personal *whim*, rather than any reason or system.
Webster - existing or coming about seemingly at *random* or by *chance* or as a *capricious* and *unreasonable* act of will
So, Calvinism says that election is not conditioned on any quality or feature or action on the saved person, but Calvinists are most certainly not claiming that God's election is irrational, capricious, random, a whim, accidental, or anything else that the word "Arbitrary" implies. God's choice is intentional and rational and fulfills God's purpose.
Oxford's second definition is "unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority." While it is true that Calvinists emphasize God's sovereignty, Calvinists do not agree that God is unrestrained in his use of power, but that all of his actions are according to his nature. God cannot lie, for example. (Num 23:19)
Webster also provide the definition, "based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something." This is probably the closest definition to your usage. The disagreement would be that this is saying that the decision is subjective. And at some level, yes, it is subjective to God. But just as God is our highest authority and our objective standard, God is God's highest authority and standard. God can't swear by anyone higher, so he swears by himself (Heb 6:13). Thus, this choice is made by the "intrinsic nature of something," specifically, of God's nature.
I respect your desire to not want to be misrepresented, and hope Calvinists listening to your message will represent your position fairly. I hope you will accept this correction in the same spirit. God's choice is unconditioned on the person, but intentional, not arbitrary.
Oracle --- By any measure or standard of logic the Calvinist gods choosing of the elect and the un-elect is impersonal, whimsical, random and discriminatory, you admit as much. The fact that you don't know why the Calvinist god hates and discriminates against billions of innocent unborn people and condemns them to barbecue in Hell *Prior to Creation* proves the case that the Calvinist god is a sadistic monster!
_"By any measure or standard of logic..."_ It's rather weird to respond like this when plainly before you is at least a subjective standard that denies it. Moreover, Calvinists believe that God is our objective standard, and we can learn about God from the Bible, which is also our objective standard because it is His Word.
Note how Biblically ignorant the first statement makes your second statement look, _"The fact that you don't know why the Calvinist god hates..."_ God hates wicked man for their sins (Ps 5:4-6) This is Bible 101 stuff, you should know the answer. All have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. You seem to believe that man is innocent and undeserving of hell.
Oracle --- You are *NOT* following along. You are the one who is ignorant. Your statements contradict one another. Apparently your reading comprehension skills are rather lacking. The Calvinist view of Christianity is so twisted and demented you cannot even keep its apologetic in line with what you say you claim to believe. That is because the Calvinist god is the invention of Lucifer. The Calvinist god is *NOT* the loving GOD of the Bible.
*IF* , Calvinism is true then it is absolutely true that the un-elect are innocent and guiltless because they act and do and believe exactly the way the sovereign Calvinist god has decreed to preordain to predestine them to be. It is 100% impossible for the un-elect to be anything other than what they are! Ergo, the hateful Calvinist god is an evil spiteful sadistic monster!
I recommend that you read Romans 1. That is what man is like apart from God and given over to themselves. Apart from God's influence, all man wills to do is rebel against him and sin. I could never call that innocent, how could you?
A murderer on trial isn't declared innocent just because he doesn't like the judge and calls him a monster, nor would any crime on the judges part annul a proper legal judgment of the murderer. You are assuming an absolutely barbaric justice system where the accused first puts the judge on trial before their own judgment can commence.
oracle --- I recommend you contemplate this.
[1] PRIOR to CREATION the sovereign Calvinist god, for his own good selfish glory, preplans to impersonally and whimsically preselect and preordain unborn human creatures for Heaven and Hell rather than base his choosing on anything within them that was worthy or meritorious of Salvation.
[2] The sovereign Calvinist god, therefore, impersonally and whimsically chooses to show unmerited special favor to those persons whom he is randomly preselecting for Heaven, likewise, he impersonally and whimsically chooses to show unjust merciless discrimination against those innocent people whom he is preselecting for Hell; all of this is done as he originally imagines his decree to preordain to predestine his future creation of them in his mind.
[3] To achieve this plan the Calvinist god enters the mind of the privileged preselected elect person and alters it in such a way as to make it impossible for the elect person to do anything other than believe in and worship the Calvinist god, efficaciously creating little mindless robots.
[4] The un-elect were made totally depraved by the Calvinist god. The un-elect behave, and do, and think, the way they do because they are being exactly they way the Calvinist god has preordained to predestine them to be. The Calvinist god hates the un-elect because they are exactly what the Calvinist god made them to be. The un-elect are innocent and guiltless because they are incapable of being anything other than what the Calvinist god decrees them to be.
[5] The sovereign Calvinist god is purposefully decreeing and hating and predestining billions of innocent unborn un-elect people so he can BARBEQUE them in Hell for his own good sadistic pleasure!
The Calvinist god sounds more like a spiteful sadistic monster than the Loving GOD who does not wish for anyone to perish traditionalists Christians believe in!
Could you calculate the % of your programs devoted to White, and the % devoted to Calvinism?
In your discussions on Sotierology, you could discuss other religions, JS.
Glenn Ashcraft
There’s a big need for this ministry. Not enough coming out against it and too many supporting and pushing it.
Calvinism is dangerous and he’s devoting his time to a worthy cause.
Dr. White is so arrogant! I love how he says the people in the Church of Christ thinks Acts 2:38 is the only verse in the Bible. 🤦🏼♂️ Of course if it was up to him he would probably make it say something else that fits his theological system. I’m tired of theological systems. I’m a Christian that’s it.
I'm guessing you never read the next verse...
Not every action brother . We do . God is monergistic in our salvation. not in every action after that. you just lost your argument . as you guys always eventually do.
Another EXCELLENT video putting down the Calvinistic heresy plague that distorts and hijacks the true doctrine of grace! Satan always has a counterfeit to God's Truth! Keep up the great work. I take notes on all your videos!
This is a very excellent video.
7:24 when you say that whether God causes people to believe, or people believe of their free will, you're setting up a false dichotomy yourself. You're mistaking God's free will (sovereignty as He practices it) as being only equal to man's free will. But these are not equal. I can write a book about a person and have complete "sovereignty" (or rather control) of what that character does in the story, but I'm not capable of also "creating" that character as also having free will. But God *is* capable of this. God is not merely equal to man, man is only an image (a 2d reflection if it were).
Also, this false dichotomy that you subscribe to is why you think what James said about this is a fallacy. You're using an exclusive OR when you should really be using an AND.
Ok flowers where do I get to the deeper level then? With you? Buuuullllshit.
1st comment 😀
You always get in the first comment, Emilio Plaza.
I've got my eye on you...
20july1944 not always lol
Dr. Flowers, your first argument is *entirely* disingenuous! You say that people are saved in your scheme - true - that is *not* the issue that Dr. White is talking about and I think you know it! Are they saved *with* or *without* the cooperation of the believer? In your scheme the would be believer has the power to accept or reject God's offer and they are *only saved* if *they* freely exercise faith. Hence *God makes their salvation possible*, but leaves the actual matter of salvation to the individual. It is *this* that Dr. White contrasts with Biblical Calvinism which says that God not only makes the offer of salvation, but applies it to the believer by the Holy Spirit *regenerating* the individual so that they exercise the gift of faith. If you *really* cannot see the distinction, rather than your false argument being just playing to your supporters, then I suggest your forget "Soteriology 101" and take "Basic Logic 101"!
Your second argument *assumes* that the individual exercising faith has the *ability* to choose whether to believe or not. This *is* a point of contention, so to use your assumption to drive a wedge between God's promise to save those who believe and those who *do* believe is *your* logical fallacy! You must *establish the truth of your assumption* which you simply don't bother to do!
Argument three is again based on *your* misrepresentation of Dr. White's point! He does not base his argument upon what God *could* choose to do, but what the Bible says of how God saves. You argue God *chooses* to go so far in salvation as to offer salvation to all. It is then up to the individual to exercise faith or not. In this scheme, whether someone is saved or not *is determined* by their exercise of faith: God relinquishes his sovereignty over salvation to the creature. This contrasts with Biblical Calvinism which recognises that "salvation is of the Lord"!
Argument four takes Dr. White's words out of context: it is clear that "everything I do" refers to in exercising faith! He is discussing salvation here, not the "creaturely" free will he holds to. It is you who misrepresent Calvinism as creating automatons. "Consistently held" for you means going beyond Calvinism, following it to *your* logical conclusions! Consistent application of logic to your position would result in believers being able to thank themselves every day for their own salvation, since it was their faith that applied salvation to them! Clearly, this is *not* what you or other non-Calvinists do - you attribute your salvation to the Lord. Don't apply different standards to those with whom you disagree than those you apply to yourself!
You follow up by misrepresenting Calvinistic teaching on God's leaving non-elect in their sin! God doesn't make his enemies hate him! They hate him and reject Christ *because they are* his enemies! Is this a straw man I see being built before me?
Why shouldn't your misunderstanding of Biblical doctrine be part of God's decree? Graciously God uses sinful and imperfect Christians to fulfil his decree, including both Calvinists and non-Calvinists! How do Christians refine their understanding of the Bible? Through the variety of interpretations that people have and viewing them against scripture? Was God wrong in not making the subjects and mode of baptism so clear that there could be no paedo-baptists? No, it makes all Christians have to consider God's word.
You claim Dr. White misrepresents your view of salvation. Do you believe God saves people *in spite of* those people or do you believe God saves people using the *free choice* of people? Where is the misrepresentation?
Almost unbelievably, you then proceeded to do exactly what you said Dr. White was falsely accusing you of! After some hand waving argument that Christ shows that God loves everyone equally (ignoring *clear* examples of Christ showing a love that *varied from person to person*: the "disciple whom Jesus loved", "Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus", etc.), you then used this universal love for *man* to create your doctrine of salvation! You even *admit* that you cannot build this view from the OT and yet still claim it is Biblical!
And you finish by a lovely defence of non-sovereign sovereignty, where God "sovereignly" puts his creatures in control, and contrasting it to a false depiction of Calvinistic sovereignty! So Calvinism says men act as a result of desires given by God, does it? The 1689 Confession says: "God hath decreed in himself... all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; *nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.*" Creatures *act freely*, but that freedom is restricted by *their* desires: "The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks."
So, well done Dr. Flowers! Not a *single* fallacy of Dr. White identified and *a whole bunch* of misrepresentations of Calvinism! Still, what else can you do as a rearguard defence of an unbilical position?
Concerning the first argument, if people are saved in “our scheme” then they are actually saved. This saving cannot be done in and of themselves otherwise God would not be necessary, and he most certainly is. So the point stands, God saves those whom he chooses, and he chooses to save those who humble themselves by his grace.
Concerning the second argument, Dr. Flowers has addressed the Calvinist’s misunderstanding of total inability many times. Instead of insisting he readdress the topic in each and every one of his videos, I direct you to the podcast titled “Dead Wrong.”
Concerning argument three, refer to my first paragraph.
Concerning argument four, it is not clear that Dr. White is referring to the exercise of faith. Especially in light of Calvin’s comments regarding God’s commands to the demons of hell to do evil. If God ordains everything, that included sins, both of omission and commission. Despite the fact that God not only doesn’t tempt men to do evil but even provides a way of escape from every temptation. That Calvin was ignorant of how God escapes the implication of being the author of evil demonstrates this undeveloped, and as of yet unanswered, perspective of Calvinism.
Concerning the follow-up, God made them vessels of dishonor. He fashioned them in that condition. He didn’t have to and could have granted grace, but chooses not to. He, therefore, is the ultimate cause of their damnation.
Concerning one’s misunderstanding being part of God's decree, other than the fact God chooses to delight in revealing himself to his children, it could be that God the Father wants some of his children to believe in lies and argue about truth while the world goes unreached and unconvinced. I tend to doubt that myself but if that is what you choose to believe…
Concerning Dr. White’s misrepresentation, he simply doesn’t describe the Traditionalists positions in the way a Traditionalist would approve. This demonstrates he doesn’t fully understand it.
Concerning the sovereignty of God, we simply disagree on the definition. We believe God is sovereign enough to allow choice and still remain in control of everything. You disagree. Yet even an earthly parent can do this so your position is proven false. As for the 1689 Confession, it is logically contradictory. It might as well say, “The man is married; yet so as thereby remaining a bachelor.” Though God can remain sovereign and allow choice, he cannot be logical and allow illogic.
YouOverThoughtIt --- You didn’t actually listen to the video because you were too busy typing your ridiculous tome. Leighton and the rest of the Biblical traditional synergists all know Salvation is of the LORD, but that’s *NOT* the question, the question is who does HE Save and why.
In the first place, the sovereign Calvinist god decrees to preordained to predestine the un-elect to have godless natures, to be totally depraved, to commit sin and evil *AND* to hate him; *FURTHERMORE,* it is axiomatically true that *IF* the sovereign Calvinist god decrees to preordained to predestine the elect to Heaven *THEN* the sovereign Calvinist god is decreeing to preordained to predestine the un-elect to Hell!
The ubiquitous cancer of contradiction within the Calvinist apologetic condemns it to the rubbish heap of theoretical Christian philosophy!
Eric Rogers Thanks for your response.
Concerning the first argument, you also missed the point! In your scheme: 1. People *are* saved. No dispute. 2. God *is* necessary. No dispute. 3. God "chooses" those who "humble themselves by his grace" *freely*. God *does not save without man's action*, whether that be faith or humbling. In Calvinism *God saves*, in the non-Calvinistic schemes *God can only save in collaboration with man.* If you can't see the distinction, then you, too, need "Basic Logic 101".
Concerning the second argument, whether Dr. Flowers has or has not addressed ability does not affect the fact that Dr. White's argument is *not fallacious* when viewed from a Calvinistic perspective, as Dr. White is doing.
Concerning argument four, look into what Dr. White calls "creaturely freedom" and you will see it is taken out of context. Please note, Dr. Flower is attacking a video by Dr. White, *not* John Calvin!
Concerning the follow-up, the ultimate cause of damnation is *sin*, it is Calvinism's opponents refusal to consider the radical nature of sin which is at the bottom of their misinterpretation of the Bible. I also see more attacks on Calvinism than the other way round. Why doesn't Dr. Flowers concentrate on reaching the unreached?
As an aside, is God in your view *unable* to arrange things so that *all* are saved? Is he *unable* to convince *all* to believe? He knew beforehand who would reject him and knew they would be damned, so why did he go ahead and create them to *be* damned anyway?
_Concerning Dr. White’s misrepresentation, he simply doesn’t describe the Traditionalists positions in the way a Traditionalist would approve. This demonstrates he doesn’t fully understand it._ No, that would be because he shows the inconsistencies of the position! Where is his description *factually* incorrect?
Concerning the sovereignty of God, this is where you betray the human, philosophical, roots of your position. The Calvinist recognises the Bible teaches both that God decreed all things *and* that he is not responsible for sin, but man is and so is morally culpable for it. You reduce the Bible's teaching to a corrupted, but logically consistent, remnant which reduces God to "still remain[ing] in control of everything" by mere foresight of autonomously free acts! That *is* the control of someone who knows what is going to happen in a sports event, because he is watching a re-run!
John Q. Public Thanks once again for your misrepresentation of Calvinism. I hope it makes you feel good!
YouOverThoughtIt --- Which bit did I misrepresent?
James White needs help.
Prof. Flowers you clearly represent the opposer to God's sovereignty in Romans 9:19. You have posed all kinds of questions and scenarios against the "Calvinist". But this is not about "Calvinism" vs "Arminianism" vs "Traditionalism". This is about how the sovereign God of creation has chosen to reveal Himself to mankind. Your points of contention are not against a system of beliefs; but against God Himself and how He has chosen to reveal Himself. You sir are siding with those who oppose God's meticulous Sovereignty, which places you on dangerous grounds.
God has proven time and betimes how His will is compatible with man's free will. God does, in point of fact, decree ALL THINGS! His decree however includes the free choices of man; whether those choices are good or evil. All of man's choices have been foreordained by God. You take umbrage with this because your mind, I perceive, is yet carnal, and thus you rebel against the hard teachings of God's Word.
Your interpretation of John 6, John 10, Romans 1-3, and Romans 9 shows that your hermaneutic is flawed. You very often conflate passages and/or concepts to make them fit your Traditionalist viewpoint. Here are some examples:
A) You love to point out the difference between God's hardening of the Jews in contrast to mankind's already fallen nature. You fail to point out sir that the Jew is equally sinful as the Gentile and that God is using them by blinding or "hardening" them even more than they would be by using their already sinful nature against them. In other words, God is hardening even more an already spiritually hardened heart. Also, this was a temporary hardening so as to make sure that all of the events surrounding Christ's crucifixion and resurrection (that God had already predestined before Creation) would come to fruition. Today, the Jew rejects Christ for the same reason Gentiles do - their hearts are wicked and they can't even see The Kingdom of God without first being born again (John 3:3). Now it should be noted that "judicial hardening" is a temporary tool used by God to accomplish His purposes (i.e. Pharaoh). The Gospel is now here and there's no need for judicial hardening of the Jews today. Again I reiterate the fact that God uses mankind's already hardened heart to make him even more "calloused" to His laws. Also Prof. Flowers -wouldn't it seem unfair for God to blind the Jews from seeing the Gospel so as to redeem the Gentile world when God could have easily done it without sending them a "spirit of stupor"? According to your view, God is blinding people from seeing the Gospel message, when He could have just equally have evangelized the Jews as well. Just like God chooses to draw only some effectually by his own sovereign decree while rejecting all others. In either case, God is choosing to reveal Himself to whomever He desires or decrees at the exclusion of either the Jews (according to your view) or unregenerate mankind (biblical view).
B) Instead of God initiating salvation, we initiate it through YOUR doctrine of humility. Why do I say this? If mankind does not exercise his "autonomous" free will, then God will not save him. According to your podcasts, mankind must first humbly "acknowledge" his sin before God and then believe of his own free will before God will save him. This is classic synergism. So man initiates the process and unless he initiates it, God cannot effectually save him. Now you always say that God is not "obligated" to save anyone just because that person humbles himself/herself. However, you need to be honest and also say that God will not save you unless you make the free choice to acknowledge your sin and believe the Gospel without any divine intervention. I often hear you say that a person makes a choice by hearing the "Holy Spirit-inspired Gospel". This is a subtle deception on your part because it precludes any effectual work of the Holy Spirit actually applying the Gospel to the unregenerate person's heart. It's your belief that unregenerate people can do good (i.e. repent and believe) outside any effectual work of the Holy Spirit. According to you Prof. Flowers, a voluntary belief in the Holy Spirit-inspired Gospel is all that's required for salvation.
So here's a question: If this Holy Spirit-inspired Gospel is so powerful Prof. Flowers, why doesn't it save EVERYONE who hears it? Why do only some humble themselves, instead of all, if the inspired Gospel alone is enough to save? The answer is this..the Gospel is POWERLESS without the Holy Spirit actually applying it to the hearts that the Father is drawing and for whom Christ has made atonement. Without the Holy Spirit working within the hearts of men to MAKE them see, repent, and believe, the Gospel message is POWERLESS!! The Gospel is "the power of God unto salvation" only in the sense that God applies the Gospel message to the hearts of His people powerfully through the Holy Spirit! "Salvation is of the Lord [alone]"..
C) Your understanding of the "flesh" is flawed which gives you a watered-down view of mankind's depravity and inability. By the way, both terms are related but mutually exclusive. Depravity describes the extent of our sinful nature; whereas, inability is one of the effects of depravity.
In Romans 8 God is describing the difference between those who are "spiritual" and those who are "fleshly". There's a deliberate dichotomy posed here to show the distinct differences between those who are saved and are walking according to the spirit and those who are unsaved and walking according to their fleshly desires. Now in v.7 God is clearly teaching that unregenerate man is angry with his Creator and, not only is his heart not in submission to God's laws, his heart does NOT possess the ability to submit to them. And to really drive this point home, God says in v.8, "they that are in the flesh CANNOT please God."
Prof. Flowers here's a prime example of how you conflate concepts to try to hold your position together. You relate those that are in the flesh in this passage to those who are said to be "carnal Christians" in 1 Cor. 3. In 1 Cor 3 Paul is addressing "babes in Christ" (v1). In other words, by all outward appearances, they were new Christians still BEHAVING like unbelievers. This is a far cry from saying that they're of the same unsaved condition as the "carnal mind" in Romans 8 that can't be subject to God's law. In 1 Cor 3 obviously this group of immature Christians were subject to God's law since Paul calls them both "bretheren" and "babes in Christ" and that he had to feed them with milk, which is to say, he had to feed them with the basic tenants of the Gospel.
The "carnal minded" in Romans 8 refers to unregenerate man's heart; whereas, "carnal" in 1 Cor 3 is referring to their behavior and the fact that they were behaving LIKE unregenerate men. Trying to equate these two concepts is conflation at its worse!
So the fact still remains that unregenerate mankind CANNOT do ANYTHING pleasing to God. In fact even his act of humility, repentance, and faith are all as menstrual rags (Isaiah 64:6). True salvific humility will only occur after God grants us a foreign and supernatural faith and repentance. Then, and only then, will authentic humility be demonstrated.
In conclusion, one sign of godly, supernatural humility is bowing to everything the Bible teaches, no matter how much it offends our carnal and fallen nature. Failure to submit to the hard truths of the Bible COULD be an indication that one's heart (no matter how pious it may seem) is still at enmity against God.
"You take umbrage with this because your mind, I perceive, is yet carnal, and thus you rebel against the hard teachings of God's Word" Therefore, only Calvinists have the spiritual mind?
@@maykelrealty that's the implication. It's why Calvinistic bad actors behave like this, sadly.
The fact that you used the word arbitrary immediately signifies that you don’t understand God, or at the least don’t understand Calvinism. God never does anything arbitrarily.
16:00 it's ironic that you claim James White is strawmaning you, yet, if you actually cared to know what he says about God's responsibility of men's evil actions, you couldn't claim that he believes God is responsible for a second. *You* are making a strawman argument now.
you guys are infatuated with autonomy. The truths in the bible are difficult to accept I get it, deal with it