Is the CALVINISM debate important?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Dr. Leighton Flowers, Director of Evangelism and Apologetics for Texas Baptists, plays a clip from John Piper quoting from CS Lewis about whether or not the Calvinism debate is really important. Dr. Piper walks through the Calvinistic TULIP expressing why he feels it’s so important to the Christian faith and Dr. Flowers responds respectfully but firmly from a Provisionist's perspective.
Resources:
1 Cor 2:14: soteriology101...
For more on Romans 1-3 referenced by Dr. Flowers: • Romans 3:10-12 De-Calv...
Nature of man: • The Nature of Man: Fal...
Rom. 8: • Romans 8: Verse by Verse
Atonement: • God's Provision of Ato...
Sovereignty: • Sovereignty De-Calvinized
Deadness: • Deadness De-Calvinized
John 10: • John 10:26 De-Calvinized
Election: • Biblical Election: 3 V...
Eph. 1: • Walking Through Ephesi...
Rom. 9: • Romans 9 Commentary by...
Predestination: • Romans 9 Commentary by...
Search other topics and texts at www.soteriology101.com
Do not forget to SUBSCRIBE!
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
“Predestined to adoption”
Calvinists take this to mean “certain lost people are chosen unconditionally to be made into believers so that they will be adopted”
We disagree. We believe Paul is saying that the faithful in Him have been destined beforehand to be adopted. Adoption is a future hope for believers in Paul’s mind (Rom 8:23). We know that we, believers, will be adopted because God has destined all who believe to that end.
Amused Patron we have free will to believe or not once God uses his good grace to let us hear the gospel. If we choose to believe, we will be adopted into the kingdom of his Son.
Amused Patron
I’m not sure why you think it doesn’t square with LFW
@@amusedpatron2655, how does it not square with libertarian free will? God has predestined that those who freely believe (by their libertarian free will) will be adopted. Adoption is one of the many blessings that God has predestined (determined beforehand) to give to those who freely believe in Him.
@@amusedpatron2655 --- You peeps are so funny. Its really sad that you can't keep up. lol!
@@amusedpatron2655, literally nowhere in any of our comments did we even imply that it's a general adoption as impersonal as gravity.
Dr. Flowers, I cannot tell you how much I appreciate what you do. Ten years ago, I was a BRAND new baby Christian. I had not yet established a solid Biblical understanding and didn’t really understand a lot of what I read in Scripture. I didn’t have a lot of believers around me until I found a church.I came across the verses that seemed to point to predestination of salvation and coming from a family of non-believers, I was confused about what this meant for my lost loved ones. Did God choose to save me but my siblings were possibly created for destruction from the beginning of time? I didn’t understand the verses I was reading and when I asked other about it, I couldn’t find an answer that really satisfied as they didn’t really address the texts. It was generally along the lines of, “God is a gentleman. He will never force Himself on anyone”. That is great but didn’t really address the texts I was struggling with. It seemed that my questions were pushed aside as nonsense. Fast forward a few months and I was on a drive to kill time. I came across a book store called “Monergism”. It said it was a Christian book store and I didn’t even have the wisdom to question the name of the store. I walked in and the owner of the shop asked me if I was interested in a particular topic. I mentioned that I was trying to understand Romans 9. I had NO idea what a Calvinist was or what kind of shop I had walked into. He then told me that God elected some to salvation and some to damnation and that we do not have free will. He said that this was God’s mercy as he did not have to save anyone. He then gave me a book called Chosen For Life. I cannot tell you the tailspin that this put me into as a new believer. It led me to questioning my faith, nearly walking away, questioning the character of God, and the love of God. Over the last ten years, I finished nursing school, got married, had children, and have been a member of a solid church where I have grown and come to a much deeper understanding of God. However, the issue of Calvinism has always been there and I have never known how to truly view God and His will/salvation. During this quarantine it has become clear to me that I need to deal with this doctrine and make a decision about where I stand on this issue. I have listened to James White, R.C. Sproul, John Piper, and others. I have also listened to Norm Geisler, Mike Winger, and you. I can’t express what it means to me to see a solid exegesis of the texts that I have struggled to understand. Thank you for helping me along this journey of understanding our God.
Amen. God is good.🤗
It's great that you're facing this issue head on. Whatever side you fall on, I think the most important thing in regards to it is that you are okay with the possibility of either doctrine. There have been many learned and faithful believers who have, from their understanding of scripture, come to believe in Calvinism. The same is true of Arminianism. That to me says that both are legitimate possibilities. I think it would be arrogant to believe either doctrine dogmatically. However, a doctrine which is undebatable biblically speaking is God's inherent goodness. That means that regardless of the mechanics of salvation, God is good. If we have faith in that, neither side is truly an issue. If Calvinism is true and we don't understand how it is just, its okay because we can have faith in God's goodness. If Arminianism is true, its okay for the same reason. God used this issue to deepen my faith when I first encountered it. I hope the same happens for you.
It's very simple because it's all about us to do the will of God the Father through the Holy Spirit, that proves that we are born again and we have the Holy Spirit in US.
IF any man will come after me, LET HIM TAKE UP HIS CROSS AND DENY HIMSELF (HIS FLESH), AND FOLLOW AFTER ME (IN SPIRIT) ❤️💕
SO IF ANYONE WILL COME AFTER JESUS, THEY HAVE GOT TO GO TO THE CROSS!
THEN WE DON'T MAKE ANY CHOICES IN THE FLESH BUT WALK IN SPIRIT DOING THE WILL OF GOD THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT.
JESUS EVEN SPOKE AGAINST FREE WILL CHOICE IN MATTHEW 7:21-23 ALSO TITUS 1:7-8 AND 2ND PETER 2:9 10
Proud of you. This is the cross that all true Christians will face. Your story is very very similar to mine. When someone told me about Calvinism I thought he was kidding and then horrified to find out how many church goers believed it. I suffered for many many years. I would call it torture! I have spent 35 years intensely beating down this Doctrine of Demons! That is what it is. Anything that makes man look at God in a bad light is from satan. Plain and simple. Calvinists will tell you they don't know if they are saved, they just hope so. There is no security in it at all. Therefore they don't share their faith or try to win souls. You are struggling because doesn't want you to fall for this lie. Calvinists preach how you can't get saved and that God is the source of all evil. Its sick and twisted! God loves EVERYONE! Died on the cross for EVERYONE! God wants EVERYONE to repent and be baptized. IF ONLY THEY WILL TURN TO JESUS TO BE SAVED. Its worce than you think. Read this statement from the website of the highest ranking Calvinist living today. These are his exact words and I quote : .....God . . . brings about all things in accordance with his will. In other words, it isn’t just that God manages to turn the evil aspects of our world to good for those who love him; it is rather that he himself brings about these evil aspects for his glory (see Ex. 9:13-16; John 9:3) and his people’s good (see Heb. 12:3-11; James 1:2-4). This includes-as incredible and as unacceptable as it may currently seem-God’s having even brought about the Nazis’ brutality at Birkenau and Auschwitz as well as the terrible killings of Dennis Rader and even the sexual abuse of a young child . . .
@@truth7416 I'm sorry but I just read John 9:3 and that has nothing at all to do with the situation we're talking about neither does James want to count it all joy when you fall into many trials I know that one by heart. Let me show you a few scriptures that might make your head spin, and this includes all of you arminians including Mr flower. Like it says in John 8:36 if the sun therefore shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. I want you to take your Bible and read all in between but I'm slipping down to John 8:43 why do you not understand my speech? EVEN BECAUSE YOU CANNOT HEAR MY WORD. 45 and because I tell you the truth, you believe me not. Which of you convinces me of sin and if I say the truth, why do you not believe me? 47 HE THAT IS OF GOD HERE IS GOD'S WORDS, YOU THEREFORE HEAR THEM NOT, BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT OF GOD.
JOHN 9:31 Now we know that God here is not sinners: BUT IF ANY MAN BE A WORSHIPER OF GOD AND DOETH HIS WILL, HIM HE HEARETH!¡!¡!¡!
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE WILL OF GOD NOT FREE WILL CHOICE MY FRIEND AND THAT'S WHAT CALVINISM IS ALL ABOUT AND WE WERE PREDESTINED TO BE HIS CHILDREN HIS CHOSEN HE LACKED OUT OF THE WORLD 🌎😎
MEANWHILE WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL GENESIS 3:22
JESUS IS THE FIRST BORN AMONG MANY BROTHERS AND SISTERS ROMANS 8:29
AND THERE WILL BE A THIRD HEAVEN WHERE JESUS WILL BE THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS REVELATIONS 4:4 AND REVELATION 21:1-2
I am weary of this debate. Thirty-five-years weary. I can't take it any more. I am walking away from the debate, because one must be careful lest one gives more attention to the debate than to Jesus and one's walk with Him. HOW I became a christian is not near as important as the fact that I AM a christian. In other words, how I got here pales in comparison to the fact that I am here. I support Dr. Flowers not only in my prayers, but I give a small monthly donation as well. I fully appreciate everything he does for those who are still struggling with this issue. Dr. Flowers, you are the one God used to set me free from the chains of Calvinism so I could walk away to spend my last years with the One Whom the debate is all about. His name is Jesus.
I understand the effects of weariness. I went round and round with an old friend who had succumbed to the seduction of TULIP. He posed the same question,"why does it matter?, I'm saved, you're saved what's the difference how we got here?"
My response is the same now as then; Why it 'matters' is because what a man believes about God's nature and His love, or the lack thereof,...towards the lost of His creation will inevitably influence our own attitude towards the lost as well. (which is actually in contrast to the actions and teaching of Jesus on earth). It matters because John Calvin's belief that God did not want to save all the lost but has actually had chosen and decreed the vast majority of humanity for eternal destruction without any hope allowed him to literally burn people at the stake with a clear conscience being convinced he was doing God a favor by saving Him the trouble, which he bragged about 30yrs later with no remorse.
Calvinism doesn't offer "Good News" to the world, only a few special souls... in their system the sacrifice of Christ can not possibly mean anything to about 90% of humanity.
That's why it "matters" to me.
I don't think about it 24/7 but being ever ready to give an account for the hope that I have is important.
A friend of mine attends a church that is just now preparing to be ripped asunder by a new pastor who didn't tell them he doesn't believe Jesus died for everybody, "only some", until he got the job, and he hasn't told most of the congregation yet.... It matters.
@@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT Thanks for your reply. I guess that I am completely burned out. I have an older brother who has been in the TULIP for decades and he has hounded me for years. I have a good bit of knowledge on the subject, and I am ready to share/warn anyone who is considering Calvinism. I am 66 and it is time for me to rest in the joy of my salvation. When I first believed, there wasn't a Calvinist within miles. God did not need one. Still doesn't. God bless.
@@ShowCat1 ....run Forrest ... run. 😉
I'm sorry it's your brother, that can make it harder to escape. I didn't grow up around Calvinism, thank God. So, when I began hearing the 'terms' and confronted with their rendition of the proof texts I was unprepared to defend what I believed. I just knew in my spirit they were wrong but it took a while to get up to speed . LOL... it took 2yrs of arguing before I finally figured out my friend had redefined "God's will" and 'sovereignty', for starters.... it's crazy.
I wish you the best of peace and rest in Christ.
I just tell them If Calvinism is true, I'm destined not to believe it, and if it's not.... then there's still hope for them.
But once those preconceived ideas take root it's all but impossible to shake it.
If you can create the doubt of total inability it's easier to unravel. Because once we realize anybody can believe when they hear the gospel there is literally no need for the "ULIP"
@@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT Well said, thanks.
Souls matter. Seeing these 2 completely depressed atheists (they literally look like they are wasting away before your eyes) who ARE atheists because they learned a corrupted view of God tells me we should be deeply rooted in the Word of God to combat false teaching. The New Testament, every book, is full of warnings against false doctrine.
Do not argue about it. Just pray for God to open doors for you to witness. Don't lose sight of the command of Christ. "Go... preach and teach". Get them in and keep them growing, walking in Christ. Disciple! Walk WITH them.
Personally, the discussions teach me how anti Christ the teaching is.
Wow, very interesting! I am a former attendee to Bethlehem Baptist. And a big fan of Derek Webb as well. Just learned he is an atheist now. I guess I am not surprised. The same thing happened to me. I actually left Piper because I thought he wasn't consistent enough in his calvinism, and joined up with the more hard line calvinist that came out and admitted that there was no real offer of salvation to the non elect, and that God hates those not chosen. Made a lot more sense to me than piper's two wills of god or what ever. Plus I hated piper's challenge that it wasnt enough to just believe the gospel, you had to LOVE the god of this gospel, and I honestly could not find love in my heart. Fear? Yes! Respect? Maybe, but no love, as much as I tried. Of course that led me to doubt I was saved or even chosen. No one is more miserable than a calvinist who suspects he is predestined to damnation! I finally broke and had to get out and away! I tried studying more different theology, but the nagging doubts and fear continued. I finally gaVe up and embraced unbelief. For a couple years it was a great relief. But I got sick of filling my life with stuff, both good and bad, but it was never fulfilling. I have since come back to Christ, but not calvinism! I trust in a much more Christ like God now, and no longer need to worry about if He loves me or not. I hope Derek will find the true loving God someday, and believe he will! Thanks again for this video.
-Michael Thompson
Michael, thanks for sharing the 'good news' ;) Rejoicing you were able to come around and accept the love the Father has for us and believe in Christ. I get amused at Piper's sincere heart-felt emotional pleading for people to love God, love God's word, worship in contrite spirit of humility... etc. when he believes and teaches that one can only love God so much as God as pre-dermined anyway, we really don't have a choice, even as Christians.
I came across John Piper's book "Don't Waste Your Life"... and laughed out loud. If he's right and Calvinism is true... wasting your life is an oxymoronic concept.
Be blessed, Love God with all your heart, soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself*.
*That's another problem with Calvinism, and especially this particular subject... Why it 'matters' is because what a man believes about God's nature and love, or the lack thereof,...towards the lost of His creation cannot help but influence our own attitude towards the lost as well.
Why would we love those God does not, even if they're our own kids.
@@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT awesome reply! Thanks brother! I wish I could get back all the years of my life I wasted believing and defending calvinism! It truly is a virus that infects Christendom! I am grateful mine wasn't a fatal case!
My son too has been turned away from Christianity saying that “if the Calvinist teachings are true then God is evil and why would anyone want to believe in that God?” I see it as an evil and tremendous trembling block
Whoa. People, read this brother's testimony. That's the fruit of this doctrine??!! I pray for you Michael that you would know that you know. He call us his "friends."
@@duncescotus2342
Hey scotus i checked out William of Ockham after you mentioned him on another video. Pretty interesting how Ockham shot down those like Scotus, but ended up a political outcast...unfortunate
My struggle is that through the COVID nonsense, my wife and I ended up strict Calvinistic church because they were the only ones open to mask free, social distance free, no pre-registration required, which we so appreciated, but now we are under a 'non stop' postmill, Calvinistic interpretation as the 'only' correct view. Our hearts are braking because there are literally no other churches open without the COVID nonsense. Please pray for us as we are considering moving 2000 miles away to find a non-calvinistic preaching church.
That's rough. Sounds like it's indicative of the values of the community where you live.
Did you find a church? I did the same thing with my family. We are in the same position now. If I'm honest, I wasn't paying close enough attention to what calvinism actually was. Now I'm searching for a new church while my family still goes to the calvinist church and my wife and I aren't on the same page. It's a brutal time.
love your perspective and your logic...you go bro‼️ You really helped my turning from calvinism...blessings to you
Praise God for you Leighton Flowers and men like you who can stand up to this doctrine. Ive got your book and read Ken Wilson's book in full. It simply validated my intuitions when I first heard calvinistic doctrine. I couldn't believe Christians actually believed what it taught, I wrestled with it when I was struggling with depression, the Calvinists interpretation would pop in my head when I came to certain verses in Proverbs and Matthew. It simply made my depression worse, why would God choose me and not my family? If He determines everything including sin, then was it His fault that I was depressed? Ken Wilsons work won't only help intellectual Christians but it will help Christians struggling with psychological despair because of this abhorrent doctrine based on the gnostic doctrines of men. I went to a Reformed college last year and failed sadly, but the theological class i was in did everything you teach on this podcast. They strawman Arminianism and act like those are the only two choices. We read both sides of the debate on baptism but didn't read a single book or article on Arminianism. I'm sure the men who teach there are Godly and well intentioned men, my theology teacher was passionate and worked hard for us, but this doctrine has this pull on intellectuals, something that draws them into this idea of the "elect". I noticed that after claiming Arminians are semi pelagian, we also learned that Christians who believe we ought not to drink alcohol are gnostics because they can not enjoy Gods created order. How ironic that it is the reformed side of theology that is imbedded in gnostic beliefs.
Your work and Dallas Willards work on the Kingdom of God and Spiritual disciplines have radically freed me in my theology. Now I'm unashamed to be affectionate with Him in prayer and not afraid of Calvinists in-doctrinaire tactics with the word play and intellectual isolationism.
the doctrine thats taught in scripture? im confused
More and more, I'm coming to the conclusion that Calvinism is basically just 'Christianity' for Narcissists.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi His perception is dead on. You are filled with pride all you can do is p;oint the finger and judge.
You have self righteousness this is why you have to vindicate your camp.
You have no humility.
The man never espoused his views. you had to make a straw man and rail. railing is a sin of verbal abuse.
You gave no reason to believe that you are not a narcissist.
"Calvinism" is your idealized self which you give egotistical admiration.
@@michaelmichael-ci8hi actually I think you will find all those who are really saved will put their crowns at Jesus' feet. Non Calvinists all the more as they were never compelled by some other authority but the love and adoration that their God would MAKE THE WAY for them to come to Him when He poured Himself out... Anyone shouting Me Me Me are not of Him. Calvinism is narcissism as the doctrine is so pathetically contrary to philosophical and biblical principles that it does shift all the way to those who espouse such. White is the perfect example of narcissism incarnate.
The narcissism comes from the whole spoiled child syndrome - He picked ME and not YOU! junk.
@@amusedpatron2655 I suppose I could add that I also feel that "rebellion", "sin" and "Narcissism" are synonyms.... I've already (apparently) kicked the hornet's nest, I might as well kick it again!
@@DaveTheTurd --- I think you've hit on something here.
"what we ought to do is get on our knees and cry out for our hearts to be opened." could the contradiction not be clearer? Piper (and calvinism/determinism) teaches that God alone can do this work in man, yet via freudian slip he implies that man is able to, that man ought to. Another great video Dr. Flowers, thank you for further solidifying my conviction that calvinism is false and yes, dangerous. My heart broke as well seeing that derek webb clip. Perfect support for why this debate is important. satan has deceived so many.
I always struggled with Calvinism in the sense that what if I just THINK I am saved and THINK I’m following Christ but there’s still the chance I’m not elect but just delusional. What if it’s all in vain because I’m not elect and have no ability to be saved. I thought that the fact that sin still dwells in me was proof that I can’t be elect because I still have anger sometimes, I still have unforgiveness in my heart. I still struggle with laziness some days. I thought it meant I’m unsavable and God has rejected me even though I fully believe in Jesus Christ as my Lord and savior. It seemed like no matter what I do or say I am inherently unlovable and unsavable and no matter what I say or do I can never have any form of assurance of salvation to know if I’m living rightly or not or to know if I even believe in the correct Jesus. Every time I’d ask questions in the comment section I get attacked about how dumb I am and just don’t understand Calvinism. NO KIDDING that’s why I’m asking! I still don’t have all the answers but I’ll never stop looking to scriptures to see His face. I’m grateful for this channel. Thank you for bringing clarity.
Amen. We are elect in Him through faith.
Amused Patron
Yes. Salvation is a gift because it’s by grace through faith. Faith isn’t a work.
Rom 3: 27 ¶ Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Rom 6: 23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
ford fairlane Amen
Adjan Boogaard
Rom 4: 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 ¶ But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,
Rom 4: 16 ¶ Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
Rom 5: 2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God
If God provided us faith then wouldn’t we have access to faith through grace?
It's important because when you teach kids that God only wants to save a few people, merely to stroke his own ego, and all the rest have no hope - which kids are smart enough to figure out, no matter how many layers of sophistry you wrap Calvinism in - then you're going to end up with a few kids who become convinced they were not chosen, and give up. That's what happened to me, and I have never in my entire existence felt so alone.
Someone said in some other comments, that if you have to tenaciously defend a doctrine then there's a good chance that person has been indoctrinated. Calvinists have no ability to think critically, (according to their views unless their God gave them the ability to think critically, in which I they did they would come out of that cult)
False doctrine especially when it comes to salvation must be actively rejected and refuted. 2 John 1:9-11
So this means that a different Christ is one who is not God...and also...who did not die for everyone.
@@amusedpatron2655 starts with getting back to the golden rule. I find Calvinists are good with the first and horrible with the second. The second, love your neighbour as yourself, is where your true Christian life is tested and leads to refinement! Without it you probably aren't in the kingdom...
@@chrisstevens1156 he didnt, John 3:16 testifies to this
@@fiveSolas879 John 3:16 establishes God's love for everyone. It does not establish an atonement for everyone to the Calvinist so I am confused to how your statement applies. But I do understand why you made it. I used to be you. Your statement does not make it true.
The verses you need to address if you desire to are
1 John 2:2
John 3:25.
Would you say that we preach a different Christ if one accepts and one denies that Christ died for everyone?
Is that an essential for being in one accord?
Is believing in Jesus in God another essential?
My initial gut response was not to respond to you because of how you said it. But I ask you to not harden your heart and to share your thoughts on my post.
@@fiveSolas879 John 3:16 is wrong and you shouldn't believe it lol
Look up Pawson "What about John 3:16"
It's a 3 hour talk, but it destroyed the verse forever for many
The Greek manuscripts rip apart English believism of verses like that
I've had friends leave the faith because of their calvinism. Deciding that if they die and go to hell then that was just gods choice and therefore had no real reason to believe.
John says God is love. Calvanism calls John a liar.
I will never understand the minds of Calvinists 😔 I can say for a fact, that before I got saved, I WAS searching for God, for several years, wondering how can I truly know Him and have fellowship with Him? How does God in Heaven really know me? I wasn’t a depraved person to the point that I didn’t search for Him! I knew I was a sinner bound for hell, but I couldn’t figure out how to rectify this… I was raised Catholic which made things harder because we didn’t read from the Bible, it wasn’t encouraged.. and we could never know if we’d make it to Heaven… but of course there was “purgatory” for Catholics to fall back on. So if we didn’t make it to confession after sinning (and doing penance), we were bound for purgatory (which I don’t think I ever trusted that… hence, I knew I was going to hell).
Thank you Leighton for fighting the good fight!🙌🏻🙏🏻
I feel that a correct soteriological view is important, because how a person views salvation shows how they believe God interacts with His creation. In predetermination, God causes people to turn away from Him, and chose prior to all creation who He would cause to turn back. With free will, we all turned away from God on our own, and He tries to persuade us to turn back, but allows us to still make the decision.
These are two very distinct ways in which God interacts with us.
You are doing a great work, Dr. Flowers! Keep it up and God will help you. 🙏🙏
Calvinism makes God responsible for sin. If there is no free will, sin is not the result of our choice or will, but the result of the sovereignty of God. The penalty for sin is eternal seperation from God. God says He is love. Love does not seek it's own. God is not who Calvinism paints Him to be.
Calvinism doesn't say there is no free will. Well, maybe some Calvinists say it that way, but this is not a majority view and not the teachings of Calvin. If you read "Institutes of the Christian Religion" Calvin has several chapters wherein he talks extensively about human free will and affirms it as biblical. The difference is that Calvinism rejects Libertarian Free Will; meaning that God can have no effect on our choices whatsoever in order for them to be genuine choices. Why anyone would state this befuddles me as we experience in reality every single day that our wills are not libertarianly free.
I do not possess the ability to fly like a bird, therefore my will is not free to choose to do so.
I can will myself to run a marathon right now all I want, but the reality is that I'm old, out of shape, have asthma and would pass out after a few miles (likely); no matter how much I will it, my will is restricted by the limitations of my body.
I can rob a bank, though it is completely against my morals, therefore my will would never choose to do so. The choices available to my will are restricted by my morals.
We experience the limitations of our wills every day, we just don't like it when God sets those limitations.
@@praytheway8837 - You contradict the truth of the concept of "free" with wordsmithing. You can indeed fly like a bird for a little while anyway. There are consequences for your choice, but it is your free decision to make.
@@HeavenGuy
"You can indeed fly like a bird for a little while anyway." Please demonstrate an instance where a human being is able to fly like a bird of their own innate ability without ANY outside influence. Note: FALLING is not FLYING. I'm not talking about the consequence of choosing to jump off a cliff and fall to your death. I did not say you can choose to jump off a cliff; I said you are not capable of choosing to fly like a bird. It is a natural restriction on your ability to will it.
PS-> The concepts of natural ability and moral ability are well-developed philosophical concepts. Not wordsmithing.
Praise God for Leighton Flowers! From another former hardcore 5 point Calvinist. These teaching sessions have resulted in an even deeper love for my God than previously possessed. It has been an eyeopener to come to the realization how I had been diminishing the love and character of a holy God. Sadly, I had been indoctrinated by MacArthur, Piper and Sproul since becoming a believer at the age of 46 in 2014.
You’ve explained this so well, Dr. Flowers! I am always so amazed and proud. So happy to have found your podcast. I specially appreciate your humbleness and your ability to debate respectfully. Thank you!
What if their is no God and no one is chosen! As CS lewis explained why is so much cultures and why in over 2000 years Calvin isn't so strong in other parts of the world? Piper needs stop talking and travel around or this just USA religion, Either God is Calvin In USA and God is different form in other Countries, determine what God loves just piper and few ones, so why should i care for those? Piper struggles a lot in his debate
God bless you Dr Flowers. Your channel is such a blessing to me.
Thank you Dr. Flowers! I appreciate your work in bringing solid exegesis to this thorny topic. Calvinism takes the wonder out of John 3:16; the glory of God's love is shorn; it turns Rebekah's, "I will go" into a boring and predictable arranged marriage; it makes the Shulamite fatalistically bound to Solomon; it takes the 'whosoever' out of my gospel; it binds my hands in evangelism; it consignes me to be s steward that buries my talent--"whatever will be will be". Calvinism strips away half of what I received by God's grace; it says to Mephibosheth, "Thou and Ziba divide the land". I don't like it. I don't see it in simple terms in scripture. It all started with Augustine, a man with schizophrenic views, meddling with the problem of dying infant's eternal destiny. And so Calvinism was birthed with infant baptism--an invention. "Shall not the judge of all the earth do right?" It might appeal to some believers as a safe place, or a way to make a certain amount of sense about difficult matters. I think it makes God like a micromanaging boss. I believe God is more astounding because he loves the world of lost sinners, that he loves me, "What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee? Lord, that I might receive my sight".
To THINK that you were chosen outside of Christ before the foundation of the world is so arrogant 🤢
No one was IN Christ BEFORE Christ.
The LAW was given BEFORE faith CAME.
Our conscience gives us awareness of the LAW.
We KNOW that we are lawbreakers, our conscience tells us so!
Those among the people that LISTEN to their conscience are prepared to hear the truth.
Those among the people that SEARED their conscience will require some hard WORK of the Holy Spirit who works THROUGH those of us that ACCEPTED the truth.
The Holy Spirit uses our MOUTHS to persuade unbelievers to BE WISE!
Someone rudely commented "OnE sImPlY cAnNoT bE bOrN aGaIn ThE dOcTrInE oF eLeCtIoN iS rEaL" as a response to someone mentioned born again Christian. My thoughts were what type of nonsense is this? How does someone come to that conclusion, then I took a peek behind the curtain of calvanism, helped me understand things I experienced such as why some sermons I've listened to online caused me to doubt my salvation or have my soul crushed, or the spirit quench. It's always made me sick to hear someone honour God with their lips but my spirit was telling me their hearts are far from Him. Calvinists go around like Marvel superheroes but their superpowers are self refutations and false humility. I get a taste of a certain teaching and the Holy spirit shows me what it's like to be in the shoes of someone who follows that teaching. Imagine bragging about being so degenerate to random strangers on the internet thinking it's glorifying God.
Definitely..... A debate between Calvinism and Provisionism is important as any Biblical debate between two opposing interpretation of the words of God, the Bible.... So that the viewers who truly seek for truth may find the answer of their own questions about some verses of the bible.....
It becomes a distraction when evangelism goes quiet.
My first 2 years after becoming Christianity I was stuffed up with all the teachings of reformed theology. Then afterwards i have to spend a decade to distinguish what I knew was from the Bible itself or from elsewhere.
Absolutely. The ramifications of these beliefs cause a lot of damage and division in the body. Besides that Truth matters. The very character of God as he has revealed himself, is at stake here. As well as all the unbelievers to whom this false teaching is a stumbling block. We should be kind and reasonable and love people, but it matters a lot. As much as addressing Catholicism and Mormonism and SDA and all the other Christian cults that mix pagan ideas with Christian Truth, inorder to pass off as christian teaching. The particulars that are found only in calvinism and paganism, are the issues. They arent wrong about everything. It is tiring though as people are captive and it's really hard to reach people in it. Which is why its persisted for so long. And unless you've seen, or taken part in, the damage to individuals and churches, you really cant grasp how much it matters. Besides that a system that claims limited attonement and determinism touches right on the gospel and perverts it.❤
It is important for the following reasons: (1) Calvinists may see the light and leave their false Soteriology, (2) non Calvinists may see the light of the TRUE GOSPEL (Provisionalism) and not go to the DARK SIDE ie Calvinism, (3) many are confused and need to listen to both sides before making an informed decision.
@@amusedpatron2655
James 2:19 "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that-and shudder."
James seemed to think that simple belief was not enough. However, I personally would argue that belief is one of the first things that is required of us. True belief can lead to a trust in God, which is faith. Faith can lead to repentance, which is the rejection of our natural tendencies and focuses. When the earthly, or natural, is rejected, the only option left that can be accepted is the spiritual. That acceptance of the Spirit is the spiritual baptism/"born again"/regeneration that comes only from God. This is why Acts 12:38 tells us to repent, and be baptized, in order for us to receive the Spirit.
Acts 2:38 "Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."
Peter makes it clear that the Holy Spirit comes after we repent and are baptized, not before. However, as I've stated, I don't believe we can repent unless we first believe. I also don't believe that we will turn away from ourselves ("pick up our crosses") unless we first trust the one we're supposed to follow. All this happens prior to us receiving the Spirit.
Thus, the Spirit does not cause faith, but faith allows the Spirit to reside in us.
Amused Patron what do you think? What does Rom 5:1 teach? How are we justified or how are we saved? By faith! Whose faith? Mine, in what? The atonement of Christ. Therefore salvation is all of God, all by His Grace, not one of my good works to merit salvation can save me. God provides the salvation, God is the sole being behind salvation, He now in His sovereignty predetermined that all mankind would have a freewill to either REJECT or RECEIVE the free gift of salvation. It is a gift offered to ALL mankind, but sadly many refuse to receive it through faith in order to be saved.
God bless you Leighton !!!!!!!
Piper: "No one who...."
No one who prefaces an argument with these words can avoid the True Scotsman fallacy.
Great video.
At min 19:10 Lazarus seems like a false comparison as these guys confuse physical death with spiritual sleep. The body of Lazarus was surely in the grave but not his spirit. Lazarus was spiritually alive before his physical death as a friend of Jesus, hence why his physical death was referred to as sleep.
John 11:11 "These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep." (Note that Lazarus was called a friend of Christ, and a friend of Christ must have faith in Christ. And we know that death cannot separate Jesus from His friends).
See also
Luke 8:52-55 And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, "Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth.
" And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead. And he put them all out, and took her by the hand, and CALLED, saying, Maid, arise. And HER SPIRIT CAME AGAIN, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat.
John 10:27-28 "My sheep HEAR my voice, and I KNOW THEM, and they FOLLOW me:
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."
2 Corinthians 5:1-8 - To be apart from the body is to be present with the Lord (assuming he knew you and you followed him and you received his Spirit while still in the body).
Since finding your videos I have come to understand the gospel for what it really is and have truly found freedom. I love John Piper and still watch him but I have come to realize I had way more doubt when I was just following his teaching. It left me with a lot of confusion surrounding if I really am saved! Thanks for what you do!
Calvinism doesn't give you assurance because how do you are elect?
So true.
That and they also have charts that show you can think you're elect but not really be elect and ultimately fall away. You were deceived the whole time because you didn't persevere. God used you for His kingdom but you weren't elect so you get to spend eternity separate from Him. Talk about twisted doctrine.
2 minutes in and my first thought is Calvinism absolutely affects the way we view God and other people which can affect the way we evangelize… absolutely affects eternity.
I agree that the Calvin/Arminian debate is important, amongst believers. Where I think the fault lies is in those who take the debate to the level of a Gospel issue, by anathematizing their opponent, rather than discussing it in its proper context as a secondary issue.
As to "Calvinisim = fatalism", you can clearly see that Scholars make IMPORTANT distinctions to prevent us from conflating the two:
"Popularly, this objection is expressed like this: “What’s going to be is going to be anyway, and I cannot do anything about it.” There are two very important differences between the biblical doctrine of the decree of God and the false teaching of fatalism. (1) Behind the decree is an intelligent, loving Being. Behind fatalism lies only impersonal blind chance. (2) Fatalism has no place for the importance of means. It only emphasizes ends. The decree of God includes all the means essential to arriving at the ends. And those means are as essential as the ends. Thus, the biblical doctrine gives proper place to human responsibility. What’s going to be is going to be through certain means and procedures and responsible human actions. Ephesians 1:11 spotlights all things, not solely ends." - Ryrie's Basic Theology p.363
"It is objected, in the fourth place, that the doctrine of decrees amounts to the heathen doctrine of fate. There is only one point of agreement between these doctrines. They both assume absolute certainty in the sequence of all events. They differ, however, not only as to the ground of that certainty, the nature of the influence by which it is secured, and the ends therein contemplated, but also in their natural effects on the reason and conscience of men." - Hodge's Systematic Theology Volume I p. 548
"Further, we remember that election, in Scripture, is as different as possible from the fatal necessity of, e.g. the Stoics. It never appears as mechanical, or as a blind destiny. It has to do with the will of a God who has given us otherwise supreme proofs that He is all-good and all-kind. And it is related to man not as a helpless and innocent being but as a sinner. It is never presented as an arbitrary force majeure. Even in Rom 9 the “silence” called for is not as if to say, “You are hopelessly passive in the grasp of infinite power,” but, “You, the creature, cannot judge your Maker, who must know infinitely more of cause and reason than his handiwork can know.” The mystery, we may be sure, had behind it supreme right and reason, but in a region which at present at least we cannot penetrate. Again, election never appears as a violation of human will. For never in the Bible is man treated as irresponsible. In the Bible the relation of the human and Divine wills is inscrutable; the reality of both is assured." - The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE) Section 7.2 under "Election".
26:30 - I don't feel your summary of TULIP is fair and I don't believe that you genuinely do either. As someone who has a clear agenda against Calvinism, if you REALLY wished to be fair, you would ask a Calvinist scholar to summarize TULIP and use that.
29:00 - I really take issue with this. We live in a world where the majority of people (including professing Christians) believe that killing babies is "good", that denying God's created order of male and female is "good", that getting rich while crushing everybody in your wake is "good", that gossip and slander are "good"; even the most pious of humanity sins and does selfish, prideful, etc, NOT good things every single day and calls them "good", do we so easily forget that Christians used to call violent, oppressive slavery "good"? and that's beside the testimony of Romans 3:12 "not one does good, not even one." How arrogant are we?..........do you REALLY think that humanity has any idea what "good" is? If you apply C.S. Lewis' quote, God would have to be ok with all these things, since He can only be good "in our sense". This also means that every time humanity shifts the definition of "good" God would need to comply with us. On contrary to your conclusion, I say that if God must be good "in our sense" THAT is when we are undermining the character of God.
And....uh the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" was not a promise of knowledge....it was a promise of death (Genesis 2:17). It was Satan who said that the tree would give us knowledge of good and evil, like God (Genesis 3:4-5).
"We aren't born defiled"????? Psalm 51:5 "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 58:3 "The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies." Romans 5:12 "12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-" Romans 3:10-12 "10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
36:30 - You "guarantee"? Really? You possess infallible wisdom? I would NEVER guarantee that my interpretation of scripture is correct.
44:00 - Dr. Flowers...really? Out of context much? Ezekiel 18:31 is not saying that we can actually do these things. It is God's response to Israel claiming that He is unjust in Ezekiel 18:25. The summary of this passage is that Israel deems themselves worthy to call God unjust, God testifies that they are the ones who are unjust, and then God challenges them to make themselves righteous (which He knows they cannot do).
You can't imply that is what Ezekiel meant either because he says in Ezekiel 36:22-28: "22 “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations to which you came. 23 And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know that I am the Lord, declares the Lord God, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes. 24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. 28 You shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and you shall be my people, and I will be your God."
God is the one taking all the action here, does it sound like God is ASKING Israel? Is He waiting for them to be ok with it? Did He say: hey this is My plan, when you guys make your choice, I'll do it. God doesn't even mention repentance or choice. In fact, in Ezekiel 36:36 God concludes "I am the Lord; I have spoken, and I will do it." Does that sound like an offer or a demand? Why is this taking place? Not for Israel, for HIS name. You severely misapplied Ezekiel 18:31, in my opinion; and it REALLY weakens your "guarantee" above.
47:30 - I agree with you here! Calvinists don't apply the scope of Jesus' atonement properly. Scripture is clear His death paid for the sins of everyone. I argue with Calvinists about this often. In my best understanding, election (usually tied to Limited Atonement as support) isn't about the scope of the atonement but actually about how the atonement is applied. In other words, Jesus' sacrifice is sufficient for all , but only the elect have that payment applied to their "account". It's in this sense that I feel atonement is "limited" as opposed to "universal" (Universalism). If I substituted "elect" for "those who choose to have faith"; I'm guessing you would agree.
49:30 - I agree with you again. Two in a row! (Do I have to turn in my Calvin Card? Lol) Calvinism gives no better assurance of salvation than Provisionism. I dare even say, outside of those who believe you can lose your salvation, Provisionism has a stronger foundation for assurance.
56:00 - Your explanation of Ephesians 1 is solid, I don't really see anything other than the words you focus on and Calvinists focus on are different and these different stresses could lead to different interpretations. I will have to study/meditate on this one.
Thank you for the video Dr. Flowers, I really appreciate that every time I watch you it forces me to challenge and think about my Calvinist Systematic; even though I disagree with you.
@Pray the Way --- I’m sorry we butted heads the way we did; you seem to be the only Calvinist to at least try to rationalize things out. You are failing at it; but you are at least trying.
YOU >>> “(1) Behind the decree is an intelligent, loving Being.”
ME >>> No. The Calvinist God is not loving; he’s hateful, whimsical, impersonal, discriminatory, unjust, merciless. None of those things are loving. I can conclusively demonstrate my claims about the Calvinist God are true. We can discuss if you want.
YOU >>> “As someone who has a clear agenda against Calvinism, if you REALLY wished to be fair, you would ask a Calvinist scholar to summarize TULIP and use that.”
ME >>> [1] If you had been paying attention you’d know he references Calvinist scholars all the time. [2] There is no consistency between what Calvinist scholars claim to believe. [3] It doesn’t matter what Calvinist claim to believe when what they claim to believe is mindless gibberish easily proven to be patently false. You would agree I hope that mindless gibberish that can be easily proven to be patently false shouldn’t be believed, right?
YOU >>> “29:00 - I really take issue with this. We live in a world where the majority of people”
ME >>> [1] This claim doesn’t make sense. [2] Calvinism is the thing that repeatedly attacks the nature and character of the GOD of the Bible. We can discuss if you want.
YOU >>> “36:30 - You "guarantee"? Really? You possess infallible wisdom? I would NEVER guarantee that my interpretation of scripture is correct.”
ME >>> Nevertheless, there is only one correct interpretation of scripture, right?
YOU >>> “If I substituted "elect" for "those who choose to have faith"; I'm guessing you would agree.”
ME >>> Correct.
I misjudged you and I apologize for that.
Peace,
.
@@JohnQPublic11
Brother, I'm sorry too. Sometimes we get so focused in on proving ourselves right that we forget there are real people, cherished children of God, on the other side of the screen and we conduct ourselves in ways that are unbecoming of those who have been sanctified by the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Apology accepted, no hard feelings, and I ask that you accept my offer of repentance as well.
Now to the fun stuff! LOL :)
You -> "The Calvinist God is not loving; he’s hateful, whimsical, impersonal, discriminatory, unjust, merciless. None of those things are loving. I can conclusively demonstrate my claims about the Calvinist God are true. We can discuss if you want."
Me -> I would be interested in this conversation if you feel you can demonstrate these attributes biblically without rhetorical emotional appeals.
You -> [1] If you had been paying attention you’d know he references Calvinist scholars all the time. [2] There is no consistency between what Calvinist scholars claim to believe. [3] It doesn’t matter what Calvinist claim to believe when what they claim to believe is mindless gibberish easily proven to be patently false. You would agree I hope that mindless gibberish that can be easily proven to be patently false shouldn’t be believed, right?
Me -> [1] I do pay attention, as you can see, I pause, rewind, relisten, and take notes during his videos :/ [2] There is no consistency between what Christians claim to believe within any Systematic, every single one is plagued with "shades of grey", I consider this a moot point. [3] Whether or not Calvinism is true is irrelevant to my statement. Dr. Flowers repeatedly asserts that Dr. White needs to use sources from the Provisionist side in order to properly represent Provisionism. I am merely holding him to the same standard. If we took this out of the theological sphere: would you say that someone who has a clear agenda and is at war with the U.S.A. is a fair source for what the U.S.A. stands for? No. In fact, we call it propaganda because it is naturally realized that their view, and thus summary, is going to be skewed and unfair.
You -> "[1] This claim doesn’t make sense. [2] Calvinism is the thing that repeatedly attacks the nature and character of the GOD of the Bible. We can discuss if you want."
Me -> This really had little to do with Calvinism vs. Arminianism. This is a disagreement with C.S. Lewis' statement and Dr. Flowers agreement with it. Dr. Flowers reads a quote from C.S. Lewis that paraphrases as such: "If God is good, He must be good in our sense of the word, otherwise we cannot call God good". Dr. Flowers adds that if we can't call God good in our sense, then we do damage to His character. My contention is that requiring God to be good by our sense means we must be able to judge Him as good in order to call Him as such. I feel that if you objectively look at modern society as well as human history it is easily demonstrable that humanity clearly has no idea what "good" is and thus C.S. Lewis' statement is a ridiculous, and furthermore, unbiblical statement. Please re-read my statements with this context in mind and not that I am arguing as a Calvinist but merely as a Christian who feels this is way off the reservation. If you still think there needs to be a discussion, I'm willing.
You -> "Nevertheless, there is only one correct interpretation of scripture, right?"
Me -> Yes, but that really misses (or at least redirects) the point, now doesn't it?
You -> "Correct."
Me -> WOOHOO!!! HAPPY DANCE!! :)
Love and prayers brother. I assure you I will make a conscious effort to deal more charitably with you in the future. Like "Making Disciples" said, wouldn't it be just irony for God to make us neighbors in eternity? LOL
@@praytheway8837 --- I finally got back to your response.
Thank you so much for your comments. Greatly appreciated.
YOU >>> “I would be interested in this conversation if you feel you can demonstrate these attributes biblically without rhetorical emotional appeals.”
ME >>> That’s not what I do. What I do is prove the doctrines of reform theology’s apologetic are patently false because they are a morass of contradictions.
YOU >>> “There is no consistency between what Christians claim to believe within any Systematic, every single one is plagued with "shades of grey", I consider this a moot point.”
ME >>> I get you. But that is why I love Dr. Flowers so much. What he is doing is rebooting the Reformation. And he is doing it by factually establishing what the Bible is actually saying.
YOU >>> “If we took this out of the theological sphere: would you say that someone who has a clear agenda and is at war with the U.S.A. is a fair source for what the U.S.A. stands for?”
ME >>> I get you. No I wouldn’t. But that is not what is happening. Like I said in my previous statement, what Dr. Flowers is doing is going back and starting from scratch, he is using all of the tools available now in 2020 to derive a factual truthful starting point and then moving forward with his theological systematic while being intellectually honest and consistent with the starting points he began with. It is patently obvious that Dr. Flowers is 100% honest in his approach to his badly needed new systematic and that the Calvinists he is challenging are intellectually dishonest people wedded to bad theology.
YOU >>> “Dr. Flowers reads a quote from C.S. Lewis that paraphrases as such: "If God is good, He must be good in our sense of the word, otherwise we cannot call God good". Dr. Flowers adds that if we can't call God good in our sense, then we do damage to His character.”
ME >>> The is fundamentally and indispensably true. The only tool we have to judge GOD is our ability to reason morally good. *”IF”* GOD’s moral character doesn’t fit within the moral parameters of the only tool we have, *the only tool GOD gave us,* to judge moral goodness *”THEN”* it is impossible to know what moral goodness is.
YOU >>> “My contention is that requiring God to be good by our sense means we must be able to judge Him as good in order to call Him as such. I feel that if you objectively look at modern society as well as human history it is easily demonstrable that humanity clearly has no idea what "good" is and thus C.S. Lewis' statement is a ridiculous, and furthermore, unbiblical statement.’
ME >>> No! Not really. You are right when you say when we look around us. But that’s not the standard. The standard is GOD and HIS moral example. And when you have Calvinists going around teaching and preaching, through their idiotic doctrines, that the Calvinist God is a ideological moral monster, that’s a problem.
YOU >>> “You -> "Nevertheless, there is only one correct interpretation of scripture, right?"
... Me -> Yes, but that really misses (or at least redirects) the point, now doesn't it?”
ME >>> No it doesn’t. It’s the whole point.
To your last comment that would be fine with me.
In the future, at the appropriate times, I am going to be posting problems Calvinists have no plausible answer for. Please jump in there.
But continuing this discussion here would be welcome.
Peace,
.
@@JohnQPublic11
You >>> That’s not what I do. What I do is prove the doctrines of reform theology’s apologetic are patently false because they are a morass of contradictions.
Me >>> Ok. I am willing to here you out and do my best to set aside assumptions to listen as objectively as humanly possible. Would you consent to allowing me to cross-examine biblically, though? I am most interested in discussing issues in biblical context, I hope you can understand that.
You >>> I get you. But that is why I love Dr. Flowers so much. What he is doing is rebooting the Reformation. And he is doing it by factually establishing what the Bible is actually saying.
Me >>> I agree with you here. One reason I take the time to listen to Dr. Flowers is because he challenges me to think critically about my beliefs. I wish he did it less in the context of a vendetta against Calvinism, but that’s neither here nor there.
You >>> I get you. No I wouldn’t. But that is not what is happening. Like I said in my previous statement, what Dr. Flowers is doing is going back and starting from scratch, he is using all of the tools available now in 2020 to derive a factual truthful starting point and then moving forward with his theological systematic while being intellectually honest and consistent with the starting points he began with. It is patently obvious that Dr. Flowers is 100% honest in his approach to his badly needed new systematic and that the Calvinists he is challenging are intellectually dishonest people wedded to bad theology.
Me>>> I understand your sentiment. Maybe my thought is clearer by stating that I think Dr. Flowers summary shortens the doctrines of TULIP too much and I feel like he uses wording that intentionally paints it I the worst light possible in order to open the door to assert his theology. Though, I think you may disagree with this as well and we may need to just set this aside as a matter of opinion.
You >>> The is fundamentally and indispensably true. The only tool we have to judge GOD is our ability to reason morally good. ”IF” GOD’s moral character doesn’t fit within the moral parameters of the only tool we have, the only tool GOD gave us, to judge moral goodness ”THEN” it is impossible to know what moral goodness is.
You >>> No! Not really. You are right when you say when we look around us. But that’s not the standard. The standard is GOD and HIS moral example. And when you have Calvinists going around teaching and preaching, through their idiotic doctrines, that the Calvinist God is a ideological moral monster, that’s a problem.
(I attached these two because my response is more coherent in reply to both simultaneously)
Me>>> I would assert that it is prudent to refrain from assuming to judge God at all. It is one thing to judge our moral goodness in our sense; but another to say God must be subject to it as well. I think our standard is the bible, but the bible also testifies that people who have studied the law their entire lives still fail to understand it. Therefore, it is from a lack of understanding of what TRUE INFALLIBLE goodness is, that we would necessarily be judging God. I don’t know, maybe I’m being overly hung up on semantics here, but I feel strongly that we should acknowledge our correct position in relationship to God.
You >>> No it doesn’t. It’s the whole point.
Me >>> To be fair, my original point was not about the infallibility of Scripture. It was about anyone’s ability to guarantee that their interpretation of scripture is correct. I readily accept wording such as “it is my best understanding” “I make a strong case for”, etc. but, outside of the Apostles, to “guarantee” your interpretation is arrogance and how cults like Mormonism were founded. I become extremely skeptical and wary when I hear this verbiage used.
You >>> In the future, at the appropriate times, I am going to be posting problems Calvinists have no plausible answer for.
I look forward to it! I may not respond back for a few days. The weekends are family and ministry time.
Peace brother.
Listening to the singer from Caedmon's Call express his basic hopelessness, which is due to his taking certain Calvinistic interpretations to their logical conclusions, is just sad. It's tragic because it's unnecessary, as those interpretations are actually not the best ones, and lead to false conclusions-- and ultimately despair and fatalism.
A systematic theology that makes people feel superior is simultaneously very attractive, and very dangerous. Cults are built on that principle. That feeling of superiority is probably why a lot of Calvinists are angry and demeaning.
MacArthur described it as "such a difficult doctrine no human could have created it". I boggled at hearing him express such naivete. What does he think the average cult believes? They believe (those with their own form of soteriology) they alone have "salvation", what kind varies widely depending on the cult.
I _LOVE_ that summarized view of Calvinism you put up. While the acronym, "TULIP" is easy to remember, your summary statements all have the word *WANT* inserted in there for easy recall as well, .
Evangelism = "apologetics means loving people enough to give them reasonable and compelling answers to their honest questions. When Christians do this, they are fulfilling the Apostle Peter's admonition to "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you" (1 Pet. 3:15).
One of the supreme modern examples of persuasive apologetics is found in C. S. Lewis. I personally know of several people who began a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and were converted to the Christian faith through reading C. S. Lewis's Mere Christianity" (Christianpost.com)
Yes, God uses different means for different people. For one it might be reading C.S.Lewis, someone else it might be a Christian friend, for another it might be a miracle. The journey is not the same for everyone, but the destination is the same.
The Laws of Non-Contradiction says Calvinism and Non Calvinism both cannot be correct.
True, but aspects of calvinism and arminianism could be true. I'd be shocked if we get to heaven and find out any one doctrine of soteriology was completely correct.
@@zachdavenport8509 I love that. Thats how I think. It's scary for any of us to think we're completely right and to defend our believes as so. The only beliefs that we should hold and know as 100% true is that Jesus is Lord and He is the only way to the father. His life, death, resurrection and ascension paid for our complete salvation. And God is triune and His word is the bible and it is complete and infallible.
Also we all need to stop being sheep to men but sheep of God, we dont need to hold a certain systematic like calvinism or arminian. I'm neither.
@@zachdavenport8509 what part of Calvinism could possibly be true?
@@missinsanelogic That we are eternally secure in the hands of the Father (John 10) that we are opposed to the knowledge of God without His intervention (John 6) that we have been predestined for salvation (Romans 8) and that we cannot help but run to God once our eyes have been opened (also John 6). Now, I'm not dogmatically saying that each of those are true, I'm just saying a plausible case could be made for each doctrine on the basis of the given texts.
@@zachdavenport8509 John 10:28 can only be possibly interpreted eternal security if you take the hard deterministic presupposition that excludes the free self deterministic will of autonomous agent.
The promise does not say, ‘My sheep cannot leave my hand’. Instead, it says, "No one shall snatch them from my hand" (John 10:28). It's one thing to stop an abduction. It's another thing to stop a departure. If we want to remain with Christ, his hand will hold us against any foe who tries to snatch us from him. But if we want to depart from him, his hand will not force us to stay.
An Eternal security interpretation of this passage is only a possibility if we take the hard deterministic presupposition that excludes the free self deterministic will of autonomous agent who in this case could self determine to depart from Him.
Do you really think the hard deterministic view of God is a possibility?
A quote from C S Lewis- "The sin, both of men and angels, was rendered possible by the fact that God gave them free will: this surrendering a portion of His omnipotence ( it is again a deathlike or descending movement) because He saw that from a world of free creatures, even though they fell, He could work out (and this is the re-ascent) a deeper happiness and a fuller splendor than any world of automata would admit." It's how Adam and Eve could fall while God was not present.., in physical form .
Thank you so much for this video, I came to faith 3 years ago and have struggled dearly with calvinism ever since I became of aware of it. I just can't wrap my head around and most importantly it was never something I understood from the Bible reading it myself and allowing the Holy Spirit to teach me......seems as if it is a doctrine of man or some other spirit.
This is one of your bests Leighton!
What they are doing is separating God from right and wrong, and making Him about nothing but power.
Thank you Leighton Flowers!
PRAISE OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST!
GLORY TO GOD!
I wish John Piper would leave the ministry. He is leading many people into deception.
"I'm in the grave, waiting to hear my name." That is so very 😥 sad.
Calvinists, were Adam and Eve "dead"? Just curious.
For me portions of Scripture that state that God is no respecter of persons (King James version), i.e. shows no favoritism and desires that all persons come to repentance and faith in Christ, - this has to be pressed into those portions that seemingly suggest God choosing only certain individuals to salvation and by default others are left to perdition. Scripture passages must be compared to scripture passages.
Except the facts don't bear out your interpretation of "respecter of persons".
- God didn't bring the Gospel to the hundreds of millions of natives in the Western Hemisphere until the mid 1500s ad
- God didn't bring the Gospel to the deaf in Africa until the 1960s
Please explain the "love of God" that doesn't bring the Gospel to these people. (and if what they had was sufficient, why bring them the Gospel after all these centuries?)
Facts are facts: God *clearly* "respects" Jews and Europeans and North Africans more than He "respects" Asians, meso Americans and the deaf.
> Scripture passages must be compared to scripture passages.
Indeed. And if your interpretation of Scripture doesn't match reality, what then?
Tim Foster Were you alive in the 1500’s?
How do you know that people group didn’t at one point receive the gospel message?
Psalm 98 seems to disagree with you:
PSALM 98:2,3
2 THE LORD HATH MADE KNOWN HIS SALVATION: his righteousness hath he openly shewed in the sight of the heathen.
3 He hath remembered his mercy and his truth toward the house of Israel: ALL THE ENDS OF THE EARTH HAVE SEEN THE SALVATION OF OUR GOD.
Does the ends of the earth not include those in the Western Hemisphere?
Scripture doesn’t care about your assumptions and opinions.
So according to YOU God didn’t bring the Gospel to those places but according to God Himself in His inspired Word He did.
Hmm I think I’ll stick with scripture on this one.
Sola Scriptura.
So very important. Making God a moral monster helps no one.....
Josh Herbel
God would not be a moral monster if Calvinism were true and that’s a bad argument because it begs your definition of morality apart from God.
@@IAmisMaster how so? God just picks and chooses. No different to picking/choosing your school yard team and bullying the lesser kids who don't get picked. Makes God a hypocrite too. Calls us to love our neighbour as our self yet doesn't show the same love He calls us to. Think about it...
@@omnitheus5442
Even if this were all true, are you in a moral position to judge the righteousness of God?
@@omnitheus5442 --- You're right. Its both funny and sad that Calvinists cannot figure out simple moral truths.
Richard Dawkins summed up the Calvinist god only he mistakenly called it the god of the old testament
About Lewis not using exegetical arguments:
1) Most English people are not interested in religion - nor were they during Lewis' lifetime
2) Exegetical arguments prove nothing: Protestants use them all the time, often against other Protestants who have their own exegeses of passages. If exegesis proved anything, the splits between Calvinists, Arminians & Lutherans would be largely ended.
3) What people often want is to be persuaded that Christianity is worthy of rational beings. Rational argument, not Bible-thumping & spewing verses that may have nothing to do with what they are used to prove or support, can go far to show that Christianity is that
4) Lewis was not interested in arguing for positions not held by all (more or less representative) Christian Churches; he was promoting "Mere" Christianity. The shibboleths of Calvinism are not part of that. No shibboleths are. The stuff in the catholic Creeds, is.
5) As for Lewis' alleged over-dependence on philosophy: Christianity, as a worldview, is & has a philosophy. Protestantism has philosophical presuppositions. As does any form of Christianity. NT Christianity has a philosophy. No religious or other outlook, whether Christian, Jewish, atheist, or any other, can avoid having philosophical presuppositions & implications. So it is totally legitimate to look at what Christian belief presupposes & entails, & why. And to do that, we cannot keep to the Biblie alone - people did not stop thinking the moment the latest Biblical book was finished.
I really think you for studies,they have given me understand why I reject Calvinism. I have found they miss quote much of the scriptures , making me believe that they do not understand what it means to be in Christ.
It is vitally important. We are talking a different Gospel here.
"God so loved the world that He sent His only Son to die. That whoever is picked before the foundation of the world shall be saved"
Fancy preaching that?
There is certainly real life “fall-out.” How I deal with “the problem of pain” has a lot to do with where I fall on a deterministic scale/perspective.
John Piper is engaging in emotional manipulation, and then contrast that with the sober explanations from Leighton Flowers.
God unchangeable decrees that some Christians reject Calvinism, which makes absolutely no sense, if Calvinism is true. This makes god nonsensical.
If free will exists, men choose to accept or reject Calvinism, based on the information they receive to make a free will decisions. Rejection of any theological position makes sense in this system.
Calvinism makes no sense.
It is sad to see men entangled and trapped by their personal philosophical conundrums (Derek). Men glory in themselves, they demand God's truth to fit into their own prideful paradigm or else they will reject it. Personal surrender to Jesus Christ and God's word in order to know the truth is childish to them. "...anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." Mark 10:15 Lord help us all search your truth at your feet as men of great need of humility. May we only boast in what the Spirit says and teaches us. Other knowledge will be burnt up. Blessings to God's church.
35:28
I really cant help but notice the irony everytime a calvinist makes that argument with that passage. It really shows how they are in bondage to a philosophy of the natural man, and think the Truth is foolishness, because its Spiritually discerned.
Thank you for this series of truth. I
recently I debated several hard core 5 point Calvinists. Their assertion that Calvinistic Predestination and total determinism as an essential doctrine to be saved was the main point of contention . My view is that it is like the rapture timing and not important as far as salvation goes. My son Jimmy goes to a John Macarthur affiliated church . They are hyper Calvinistic, if I may use that term , calling the issue "God's Sovereignty "One evening we were having dinner at Jimmy's home with another couple from his church . The subject of predestination came up and I stated that I leaned closer to the Arminian view ,but thought the real truth lay somewhere in the middle . You could of heard a pin drop ! I was actually surprised that they were so offended that I said such a thing . It was almost like they were ready to throw me under the bus with the Mormons and JW's as a heretic. Now at the same time I reject MacArthur's teaching on unconditional election and cessationism , I still consider him a brother in Christ seeing as I believe these issues are non essentials. I consider MacArthur and the members of Jimmy's church firmly in the Body of Christ . I believe we can reject Calvinism and still love Calvinists as brothers and sisters in Christ. Even John Calvin was not a Calvinist! He was a follower of Jesus Christ.
It always makes me cringe when pastors start crying, at least when they're as wrong as this.
As I an ex-Calvinist, I agree with Lewis. Calvinism does not have the precise notion of the Lutheran "means of grace", it is not the center rod - that is God uses means to deliver his gift, ie faith. Since Arminianism is a child of Calvinism, both do not have the same robust understanding of the "means of grace' ie the place where you will find God's promises to the sinner - His Word and Sacrament (Baptism and Lord's Supper). To me, and I am not a so-called US Synodic Lutheran, so called confessional (since that has been muddled up), the concept of means of grace answers well why we can attribute to God our salvation since it was him who sent Christ, His Word and why we can only fault ourselves when we do not wind up in heaven.
How is Calvinism "exegetical and theological"? Is it because it can pull up scriptures out of context and then throw at it an answer to a philosophical question not being dealt with in the text? I don't see one point in TULIP where this is not the case.
Dear mr. Flowers, would you sincerely put so much effort in rebutting Calvinism if it were not a devastating heresy !? Which makes your 'brother' (courteous) approach slightly pretentious !?
If any of these guys are right, we are so screwed.
Thank you, Dr Flowers, for an interesting video. I'd just like to say something about the seeming "negative inference fallacy" of John Piper. I'm actually pretty certain that when Piper quotes those scriptures about Christ dying "for His people/sheep/church", he genuinely _does not_ have in mind the logic: "and the point of this is that He did not die for anyone else."
Piper's version of the "3rd point of Calvinism" seems to be somewhat different from the limited atonement doctrine of most of the famous Calvinist preachers.
- I get the impression (but might be wrong?) that in Piper's view, Christ's substitutionary atonement did include a payment for all mankind, purchasing the availability of a channel of redemption to every person without exception.
- But he believes that in addition, Christ _purchased the certainty of redemption_ for all those whom God had elected.
I think most of the famous Calvinist preachers accept the latter while rejecting the former. But for Piper, it is *the presence, as opposed to absence, of this latter type of purchase of redemption within what the atonement achieved* that is what the "3rd point of Calvinism" is all about.
In other words, the essential point of contention for Piper does _not_ focus on "the whole world versus only the elect", but rather on the contrast between
- "a purchase of definite redemption for the elect"
versus
- "What was purchased for elect people is no different from what was purchased for everyone else, and the role of election only comes afterwards in determining for some people to accept this purchased gift of redemption."
So for Piper, I think the word "limited" refers merely to the already obvious fact that if the purchase of certain redemption was present in the atonement, then this purchase of certain redemption was only for elect people. (And hence, unsurprisingly, Piper doesn't really like the term "limited atonement" to describe his viewpoint.)
I never thought that John Piper's view on security of the believer would be so immature.
I believe in calvinism until I heard John Piper preach about john bunyan, listen to it, it is terrible theology
piper talks about a rapist and talks with it about calvinism
Yikes! That gets me to thinking.... If God determines all, then why prefer Jacob over Esau? Why not use whichever was first-born, if neither can come to Him without his choosing them to be able to believe? God's own law later tells the Israelites that the first male to break the womb should be consecrated to Him. Yet he takes Jacob, not Esau, picks him before their births even.
The video with the Derrick is a punch in the face to Calvinism.
My biggest issue with Piper is he talks so weird. It is really hard to follow someone who talks like an emotional wreck.
Good observation.
Little Billy: Daddy Calvin, how come you never shared the gospel with me?
Daddy Calvin: because you probably aren't among the chosen and I don't want to give you false hope.
Little Billy: are you among the chosen?
Daddy Calvin: absolutely, I'm going to heaven.
Little Billy: I want to go to heaven too, and I'm horribly frightened of hell.. what can I do daddy?
Daddy Calvin: not a damn thing son, except pray that God loves you and chooses you otherwise you will end up in hell.
Little Billy: you're a cold uncaring bastard Daddy!!!
Daddy Calvin: I'm also a calvinist.. but God loves me anyway 😇 OFFENDED? I DEARLY HOPE SO
Piper always seems like a dramatic actor
be aware pf soft talking salesman
Anybody else get the Advertisement for forquan Project. Distributing the Quran. Time to go witness.
15:20 The one who believes he can do hermeneutics without "alien philosophical presuppositions" also believes he can take a shower without getting wet.
Perhaps another view...If you assumed all biblical references to the elect were made by a Jewish Believer writing to Gentiles and these references are to contextualise God’s purpose to choose/elect Israel for the purpose to bring forth Messiah, thereby opening up the gospel to all, Jew and Gentile alike. Then the debate is moot.
Sir I am not sure you get it. People especially Calvinist, constantly use a fraction of a chapter in the Bible to prove their point. The Bible can easily be used to control. Centuries of history has proven that.
You can frame the gospel anyway you like, write a book about it and con millions into giving you money for a false doctrine. Buy my books, buy my study Bible, become a member of my church and serve full time, listen to all my sermons, tithe six figures, do all this and you may prove to me you are saved. The dangling carrot of a false assurance of salvation and false converts is a travesty in this world. Anyone who does not point people to Christ and the cross are going to be doubly accounted twice as many coals.
So if lost are Totally Incapable of believing, understanding, or seeing the truths of God in Calvinism, how did Derek Webb understand, teach, sing and lead THE CALVINIST movement? How does Abraham Piper “deconstruct” his faith which sounds just like Calvinism?
Derek Webb is hardened, yet he blames God for it. What a predicament to be in? That is torturous. Doesn't God say, "Draw near to me and I'll draw near to you" or words to that effect? Derek, snap out of it. Hear and believe and repent for your disbelief in the gospel.
Theologians are chosen amongst believers to debate so we and the world might be brought closer and closer to redemption, in God's predetermined purpose to bring all to glory.
The world eventually will be sanctified as the called decide to respond, becoming salt and light in the world.
Not all who believe have this constant yearning to learn more about God, and have been given a heart to help people, guard their minds, make songs, exhort, edify, etc.
This is so because everyone plays a role in the work of transformation God has been doing, is doing, and will complete.
The sons of God will then be revealed, all of creation is waiting for this project since to be manifest.
People resist Calvinist because of the witness of the Holy Spirit in their spirit. Calvinism is evil determinism.
Isn't it all "Decreed" and Sovereignly Decreed at that. So John Piper should have said we have no role in the matter God has decreed these disagreements!
When studying history and the roots of beliefs, it is the gnostic soil from which TULIP
came came forth.
Great video your information certainly clears up a lot of questions I had. Thank you so very much for sharing this in valuable information. Keep up the good work. God Bless
I'm a Calvinist.... but don't feel it's a necessary topic to hammer on.... nor argue about. There is a lack of wisdom and maturity in these debates. Pay attention. Know when to speak and remain silent.
I avoid discussions about it where it's really just people airing their opinions.
I find the doctrines of grace to be breathtaking..... but because I believe in God's Sovereignty....I trust that not everyone will see every doctrine the same.
Maybe God knows that some would become lazy if they became calvinist. He will love his own and lead them as a shepherd.
Soli Deo Gloria
I love my arminian fam in the Lord 100% ..... it's all about the Gospel
I think you have done a great job amd it is significant. You have pretty much covered fully the proper view. That said how many more videos do we need on this topic.
How many videos are there out there now.
You are such a good teacher. And i feel you have pretty much exhausted all rebuttles to Calvinism.
Is there a scripture reference for Satan wanting everybody?
Well we’re getting down to the wire now aren’t we in this battle between God and Satan and whether we’re the pawn or the prize. It’s becoming apparent that there will be a choice given to all who dwell upon the face of the earth whether or not to obey God or satan in whether or not one will take this mark or name or the number of his name and bow down and worship this image of the beast. ism’s won’t and have never mattered but choosing this day whom one will serve matters for eternity. I for one will render unto God the things that are Gods. I hope you join us.
Amen
I agree that these doctrines are extremely important to talk about. Only because Calvinism is so wildly outside of anything, even remotely resembling the gospel or the God of scripture, that its foolishness must be squashed like the cockroach it is at every opportunity. It may very well be as absurd a doctrine as the ridiculous word faith nonsense is. But like the word faith followers, the calvinist can not see the deception they're caught in. Because that's how deception works. By deceiving its followers.
At 14:37 I wish you had included more of Bignon’s live stream. I wanted to see how he would explain his determinism. There is a difference between determinism and fatalism...
Around 17:15
You seem to get determinism and fatalism mixed up...
In determinism the ends are determined but not necessarily the causes leading to those ends. In fatalism the causes and ends are determined and they cannot be changed.
Nice video. I don't think my appreciation is worth much, because I am a degenerate regenerate 🤣. This text brought to you sovereignly before the beginning of time 😜.
24:50 than why are there people deemed unsaved in churches for not producing "fruit"? Shouldn't it stand to reason that anyone who wants and is there is saved because no one that desires to believe and know God is able to do so without regeneration?
This was awesome! Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Flowers. We have a small fellowship with elders only, no pastor. We are a home church that grew. Some differences in theology are now emerging with some new members and so the elders are working on a statement of faith. One of the men informed me that he is a Reformed Calvinist and he says this is a non essential, so we shouldn't divide over it. I am very sick about it all. I just dompt know if I can feel comfortable worshipping God with people who have such a distorted view of our precious Lord's love. Can you address how er can handle situations like this?
The dead like Lazarus phrase calvanist use urks me. It's out of context and it's twisted to a soteriological stand point. When I believe it was used as an example of the body resurrection that Jesus was about to go through.
It's just an analogy. It doesn't need to be in context.
@@peterfox7663 when they say dead "like" Lazarus I believe they're trying to draw a comparison.
@@brandonmack8573 Yes it's an analogy, used to illustrate their view of salvation: man has a dead spirit, just as dead as Lazarus, and God calls to His Elect to raise them to spiritual life, just as Jesus called to Lazarus to raise him to physical life.
It's not a prooftext of pre-faith regeneration, nor is it used as such.
@@peterfox7663 I understand this and I understand why they chose to use it but Lazarus was physically dead. Spiritual deafness is different then physical that's why it bothers me. Lazarus believed in Jesus. This is why Martha says he would ruse again on the last day. She didn't know Jesus was going too raise him from the dead then. This is why the dead like Lazarus birders me. Lazarus wasn't like those who are spiritually dead.
@@brandonmack8573 The analogy is not about Lazarus being spiritually dead. Lazarus's spiritual condition has absolutely nothing to do with the analogy.
What does it matter if people leave the faith? Even people that followed Jesus left HIM.
ITS A MATTER OF WHERE THEY WILL SPEND IN ETERNITY. Y'all love pride too much you step away from repentance and acxountability
Sorry, Dr. Flowers, as does Dr. John Lennox, C.S. Lewis was right on focusing on Mere Christianity, rather than on the diabolically divisiveness of Calvinistic systematic theology. Dr. Piper sounds like a sweet brother, but his Calvinistic soteriology dishonors God, Scripture, and Christian unity, in time and in view of eternity. On the other hand, for this reason, Piper, et al.'s bogus systematic theology must be challenged, thus, the importance of your work on soteriology 101. Nonetheless, be weary, brother Flowers, even about your own systematic theology over biblical theology.
Yes! Biblical theology is the 'bridge' discipline. Systematics is the cart but is too often used by the unlearned as the horse...
Piper is so wrong about the worship aspect, at least in how fervently people worship. Some of the most thankful, praising people I've ever seen are non-Calvinists. They don't think "well, I only needed a little of God's help, the rest was up to me, so I don't really need to worship that deeply or fervently." If anything, I've seen quite the opposite within the Body of Christ on Earth. This does not indicate that they are correct in their beliefs on determinism, but I do think his conception of their attitude about worship is deeply flawed.
Romans 8:20-21 The creation WAS MADE subject to vanity (or sin), NOT 🚫 WILLINGLY BUT BY REASON, OF HIM WHO HAVE SUBJECTED THE SAME AND HOPE. (JESUS.)
21 Because the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption (or sin,) ≥≥≥INTO THE GLORIOUS LIBERTY OF THE CHILDREN OF GOD.≤≤≤❤️😂💕
WE NEED TO DIE OVER THE FLESH, N WALK IN SPIRIT 2B SAVED. Matthew 16:24
Just random Open Theism thoughts: Could it be when God created autonomous earth-bound creatures with true free will, it was really Him acquiescing or trading His intimate knowledge of cascaded far future events? This does seem to level-out the heavily lopsided playing field between Him our adversary.. Thus, could we then say God designed it that He would hold only a general plan to guide all things to an eventual restitution? Eg: Setting up and deposing kings and such (typically those whose Caligula-like hearts had self hardened to reject the knowledge of God, and instead were given over to being used as vessels of wrath). That would also explain, in my mind anyway, the presence and participation of a 3rd party (of angelic creatures) to witness, and one day legally attest to, His righteous judgment of the whole ~7000 year ordeal? (I mean, who would have written out the details in those books anyway?)
I have religious people around me making wide omniscience and sovereignty assumptions like "God doesn't live in time and therefore knows all future events'', but I reply, "I'm OK with that in principle, but it seems to necessitate the understanding of an almost infinitely meddling puppeteer which then takes me back to previous nightmares of EDD (Calvinism), and I'm not going back to that bondage". There comes a point where predicting an infinitude of likely results and cascades of such millions of decisions of millions of people affecting each other like atoms in a reactor over just a few decades would snowball into an act similar to God engaging in illogical acts against His own rational nature (like creating silly infinite rocks He cannot lift, etc..).
On accountability: Things in history may one day turn out to be more eternally equitable than we might like to admit. The average age of mortality in history has been somewhat less than the biblical "three score and ten" and children in Israel are quoted as not being able to go to war or bring an atonement for themselves under the age of 20, so the parents had to do this for them instead. I think for most of Judaeo-Christianity, this is called the age of accountability. Of course, our designer knows the body we would be required to wear would have the slowest PFC brain development of any mammal on earth and for most individuals, this is complete at age 25. So could it be that the Great White Throne judgment may indeed show us far more grace than we would even allot to ourselves? Just saying.
Anyway, why should designing a more level playing field and allowing mankind free will (mostly at the risk of destroying themselves) detract from His glory or cause any unrest for an infinite being? I mean, giving Him glory is orderly, harmonious and in our highest interest since everything belongs to Him anyway. I would think the most difficult thing in all creation for God to do, under these conditions, would be to maximize the number of good eternal results on the part of inferior beings like us, who never asked to be born in the first place..
I wish we didnt have to hear these Calvinist. I have been reading the bible since I was 10 years old and I knew that people had free will even then. Even as a 10 year old reading the OT I knew God had given me a choice to follow and obey him or not.
20:43 “That clip breaks my heart”. Me too, but not for the same reasons. You’re implying that Calvinism is keeping him from not taking responsibility and believing. I guarantee that if he believed that Arminianism was true then he would come up with a different excuse. Why? Romans 1:18-23.
Why else? Because God has not given him the “new nature”. The Holy Spirit had not (yet) caused him to be born again.
John 3:3-8
Molinism is the answer. Both Calvinism and Armineism fail to incorporate each other's data. Molinism does both.