Were you born again from above and made a new creature in Christ by the grace of God alone before you became a Self Determinist? Or, was it after you rejected Gods grace alone and became a Self Determinist that you feel you were born again from above and made an entirely new creature in Christ? Honest question. PS. EDIT. Addition: Maybe you don't think you've been born again from above, yet. Thats option 3 I guess.
@@ManassehJones salvation is by grace through faith. God as always bestowed righteousness on those willing to believe. Check the list in Hebrews 11 it's not exhaustive, it is illustrative of the principal. God is not obligated to save anybody but he graciously saves those who believe
@@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT That's not what I asked "him." I asked him about new new birth. When was it. I already know you're reprobate, nothing could be clearer than your worshipping the creature more than the Creator, and having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Promising news is that God chooses to save some reprobates, so until you take that last breath in the land of the living there still is hope He saves you.
@@ManassehJones Sorry Manny, your question didn't specify who the "him" was. But your question mentioned, "made a new creature in Christ by the grace of God alone"... Actually, it is not by Grace alone which is involved in salvation. God is gracious to save... but God only promises to save those willing to believe.... And the search for any scripture which says all men are "born" unable to believe came up empty. Some will, some wont, but anyone can believe.... That's why they call it "Good News" for all men. To quote a famous author ..... We are saved "By Grace Through Faith". Not Grace alone. No sane person would 'boast' about receiving anything unearned and undeserved. Abraham's faith did not save him or make him righteous. Faith is not meritorious... but it is that to which God responds. Remind me again what part of TULIP is it which you disavow?
At about the 45 minute mark you talked about what Calvinistic doctrine does to a person mentally and spiritually. Receiving biblical counseling from a Calvinistic perspective will cause great damage and pain!! I walked through three years of mental torture before I realized I had a theological difference with the church I was a member of for 29 years. I did not understand the ramifications of this belief system or that I sat under this teaching. I was locked in a system and didn't know. Understanding God's Word without the lens of Calvinism brought healing and growth in my relationship with Christ. If you're struggling with anything turn to Christ and run from any church that counsels from a Reformed/Calvinistic perspective. ACBC counseling which has invaded many churches is Calvinistic. Calvinism/determinism worked out will not lead a person to the God of Scripture. And I will speak to what happened to me - I could only see an unloving God who controlled everything and determined all that happened to me. If I didn't know how to surrender correctly or even what it looked like to surrender so I could walk with God correctly then I wasn't elect and I wasn't loved by God. The whole system when worked out truthfully will put someone in a pit so deep...only the grace of God climbing into the pit can get a person out. Calvinism is cruel unbiblical teaching that mars the very character of God.
Thank you for posting this important first-hand testimony. How we view God and our relationship with Him is amongst the most important things, and Calvinism seems to implicate God as the villain. We know from The Holy Bible that He isn't.
A good thing to remember that may keep some folks from talking past each other on here: Calvinists and non-Calvinists have completely different definitions of the word "Sovereignty." To the Calvinist crowd, "Sovereignty" is essentially a synonym for "Divine Determinism." To non-Calvinists, Sovereignty means Authority and Power over all things. They are not the same.
That's some really helpful information. Thank you. Could you define anything in the creation, both seen and unseen, that the LORD God is NOT SOVE-REIGHN over according to you Self Determinists?
@ManassehJones He is Sovereign over everything. Period. In his Sovereignty, he Sovereignly decreed that as His image-bearers, we would occasionally have the power, from Him, to determine some things for themselves. "Self-Determinism" (as you refer to it, although we commonly refer to it as "Responsibility")is a gift from God, not a paradox or a contrast with His Authority. There is nothing that God is not Sovereign over. Nothing. Not one thing, even our God-given, Sovereignly ordained free wills.
@@GhostBearCommander 🎯🎯The issue revolves around the proper definition of sovereign. Calvinists misuse the term 'sovereign' as a distraction in argument to get a "buy-in" because God's sovereignty is not in question... BUT they actually mean to say that God "meticulously controls" all things at all times. Which is not what the Bible ever indicates. God is not required to control anything simply because he could if he chose to. God is not obligated to exert the full extent of his power over any situation, God is free to do as he pleases, which includes nothing at all. He is not in bondage to his own abilities. Calvinists seem to assume God uses his power as if they might if only they had it. Satan is focused on God's power and is jealous of it... he is not at all concerned about God's Love. Creating beings with the freedom to choose their own path, to love, honor and obey him or rebel against him is no threat to God's sovereignty. God was equally as sovereign over his creation in the Garden before the fall a he is afterwards.
You are right when you say that Calvinism messes people’s relationship with God and life in general. My walking with God was ok until they started to preach these doctrines of TULIP. I got confused at first (bringing a direct contradiction to what 1 Corinthians 14:33 states), but then it became unbearable when they said that the Lord Jesus did not die for all. That was shocking and I knew something fishy was definitely going on. From there on, I haven’t been able to have a good and sincere relationship with my Calvinistic brothers in Christ. Calvinism had just brought darkness, confusion, and division. It’s like when a reformed preacher starts preaching, I don’t really know if what they say is honest or it’s just a message for the elect, otherwise it doesn’t make any sense to preach against false teachers, or sin and call people to repentance, because if they are not elect, they won’t turn to God… It’s nonsense. The only one thing good about Calvinism is that it made me study the Scriptures in more depth to realize that this is a destructive doctrine.
Easy to prove by Bible and logic that Jesus did not die for all. Are you open minded enough to hear it? First, you most likely believe in limited atonement. Otherwise, you would believe in universal atonement. And there are some Christians, however mixed up, who believe that everyone is saved. I'll bet you are a limited man on this issue. But let's put this to the test. Pick your favorite OT lost person. Do you like Goliath? Pharoah? Ahab? Jezebel? Any will do. According to Jesus in the NT, where are these folks right now and what are they doing? They are in Hell, experiencing forever the wrath of God against them, having died in their sins, and now paying for their sinfulness throughout eternity. Now back to Jesus. If, say, Ahab is at this very moment experiencing the wrath of God forever and ever for his sins, then how could a just and loving God force His wrath upon His Son on the cross 880 years later to pay for Ahab's sins when Ahab has been doing just that already for 880 years before Calvary? To believe that, we have the situation of Christ being crucified again, something really condemned in Hebrews 6. Further, we also run afoul of Isaiah 53 wherein we have the depiction of the suffering servant (Jesus) seeing the travail of His soul and being satisfied. Not dissatisfied. Not worrying about Ahab still suffering for Ahab's sins despite what Jesus would attempt to do for him. And we don't have a truly angry Son of God wondering why the Father is making Him die in vain for someone in Hell forever anyway. Do you see the many problems here? In other words, Isaiah 53 is saying that Jesus is not some kind of masochist who just likes to suffer for sin; instead He suffers for the sins of a particular people, in this case, the elect. And only the elect. A limited (like A/Ps and Calvinists would both agree on) albeit large group of people. Jesus prays about this very thing in John 17 when he declines to pray for the world. And our Dear Lord is satisfied in His great work to save these elect people. The people given to Christ by the Father for salvation. Jesus actually and literally saves them. All of them. Again, John 17. This one teaching from God's word destroys Arminian/Provisionism in one move since we see here from God's word that Christ did not die for everyone. He died for the elect. Have a problem with that? Talk to the Judge. That will preach all day. Amen. Btw, there are at least two additional Bible teaching scenarios that prove A/P wrong, but also actually impossible as in "you can't get there from here" impossible. Stay tuned.
@@macdaddyp8437Yep, this video reminds me of the kind of people who rejected the Man who was the original "Calvinist" (as many would call Him) John 12:37-40. And why. Also, in this video Jordan Yahoo is reminding me of Ed Wood when he brought out Bela Lugosi to be in his "Plan 9 from Outer Space."
@@Gablesman888the Bible has been logically used to prove many things including slavery, wars of conquest, and subjugation of women. Logic is only as valuable as the premises upon which it is based. Your logic assumes it's own end from the beginning of it's reasoning, and is therefore flawed. Limited atonement does not have to conform to the definition imposed upon it by Calvinist dogma. Conditional atonement is both limited and applicable to all people who chose to believe - thus, "He died once for ALL...". It satisfies all necessary clauses in scripture without adding extra-biblical ideas nor attributing things to God that are contrary to His revealed nature. A loving God does not create people to suffer eternally for his personal glory. He doesn't need to. He is full of all glory with or without our adoration. Furthermore, you assume that Ahab is in hell suffering eternal torment as imagined by the medieval interpreters of scripture, but that is not contextually accurate. Hades, Sheol, and Gehenna are words used to refer to the abode of the dead, the underworld, the grave - not the hell of burning fire imagined by the reformers and their theological forebears. Take the story of Lazarus and the rich man. On one side we have Lazarus and Abraham in paradise - Eden, or spiritual Israel - while the rich man is in the wilderness, the wasteland. It's referred to a a "fiery place" and we imagine that literally, but there is no fire in the story unless we put it there. Similarly, Egypt is referred to as a furnace, but is it literally a furnace, or is that metaphoric description? The only place we read about sinners thrown into a fiery pit is the lake of fire in Revelation. I don't think this is a place of eternal torment as much as it is a place of final destruction, seeing how both death and the grave are thrown in also, and neither of them have bodies, nor are they persons who are able to suffer. For that matter, human souls do not have bodies either, and cannot be tormented by fire. For a more thorough take on this subject, Professor Edward Fudge does a great job in his book, "The Fire that Consumes". Now, you may want to take these scriptures literally, but that would also mean, for logical consistency, that you'd have to remove your hands and your eyes if they caused you to sin. Imparting selfish, human motives to God - like personal glory or wrath that cannot be satisfied without violence - lessens Him for the sake of fitting into a box of our understanding. Calvinists retort, "You just don't understand the wisdom of God", but if the wisdom of God is beyond our ability to comprehend, then why do Calvinists also proclaim to understand it better than others with differing views? In the Armenian-Wesleyan view, God is sovereign enough to remain so in the face of human free will. He is not shackled to us for either His glory or our cooperation in accomplishing His will. Instead of a God who is so small He must pre-determine & micro manage every single event for His own glory - including child sexual molestation and the eternal suffering of his enemies - we accept a God who is big enough to accomplish His good, perfect, loving will even if we chose not to follow it. Furthermore, God is a free will being who created us in him image and likeness. Thus, we are also free will beings, and that fact did not change with the fall. Hence all the scriptures about choosing life and not hardening our hearts. Determinism renders all these scriptures not only useless, but contradictory. Why encourage people to choose who cannot choose? Is God so childish that He plays these kinds of head games? Is He so petty that He will arbitrarily allow an innocent person to be punished in place of sinners? Or maybe, there's another way of viewing God's wrath just like there is another way of viewing God's foreknowledge, sovereignty, and the limitedness of atonement? As an example of determinism not being the sole means of explaining God's relationship with His creation, consider the story of David at the city of Keilah in 1 Samuel 23. Saul finds out David is in a city and goes to capture him. David finds out and asks the Lord two questions: Will Saul come to Keilah, and will the people hand him over? The answer to both is, "Yes". So David and his men leave. Saul never goes to Keilah and the people never hand David over. God knows two things that did not happen because David made a choice based on new information. Foreknowledge does not equal for ordained or determined. The gospel works the same way. God presents information, revelation, and allows people to choose, just like He did in Eden, just like He did repeatedly with Israel, just like Jesus and His disciples did in their ministry. Finally, Calvinism is, at it's roots, irrelevant. If God predetermined who will and won't believe, then He predetermined all of us non-Calvinists to hold to Arminian-Wesleyan theology. If Calvinism is true, there's no point arguing against Arminianism, because God determined it for us. Likewise, if Calvinism is false, you freely choose to believe it, and I'm perfectly fine with you doing so because it's your choice, and it won't disqualify you from saving faith in Christ. So, in the end, it really doesn't matter, and we should probably stop disqualifying other believers and dividing the body over secondary issues. Sorry for the long post, but I hope it at least helped you understand a different point of view.
@@dw5523 You must learn to write sensibly and without endless wordiness. I did not read this mess. It is too long. Do it over if you like and say what you were going to say in 100 words or less. Sell your "treatises" to Doubleday. LOL. P.S. One of my missives here was way too long too and I ask your forgiveness.
@@Gablesman888 you must learn to write with less hypocrisy and arrogance. I didn't read this mess. Too little effort. Do it over if you like and say what you were going to say with a little humility. Sell your smug condescension to the atheists, LOL. P.S. next time be lazy all the way and don't bother replaying when you can't be bothered to read.
When your a protestant who believes in a nascent theology that the historical Church has never believed like calvinism its hard to break out of it when your in these circles. The Body of Christ held a council that dealt with these heresies in the late 1600s. God bless you man.
LOL. Many in the early church held to 1 or more of the doctrines of grace. Source: The Cause of God and of Truth by John Gill. It's a free e-book on Monergism.
I can recount a moment where I was wrestling with the implications of Calvinistic teaching. And when it came to a head, I went to the Lord in prayer and asked Him “Lord, did you come to save the whole world, or did you come to save only the elect?” And I heard Him respond this one sentence. I heard it as clearly as I can hear these two men. As simple an answer as could be given. He said “I came to save sinners.” And two months later, the Lord showed me this simple passage of Scripture that settled all doubt in my soul. 1 Timothy 1:15: “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.”
Romans 3:26 that God might be just….Calvinism steals God’s justification. If he didn’t die for all and doesn’t freely offers salvation to all how is God justified. Good show Jordan I enjoyed this interview.
Great discussion! I can relate quite a bit to these stories. I was a very passionate calvinist for 6 years while i was studying theology in college and was really into people like MacArthur, piper, washer, white, and sproul. I'm no longer calvinist. I still have have a lot of respect for some of those guys, but i agree that calvinism can cause some pretty negative psychological and communal issues.
Everything I believe, I got from Scripture. I don't care what the interpretation is of any other person. That's how you stay on the right path. Let the Spirit course correct you. 1 John 2:27 KJV But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
And how do you know that your interpretation of what the Bible teaches is true and correct? Sure, the Holy Spirit must guide us in all things, but His guidance is not against logic, reason and coherence. In my opinion it's very simple to test if your interpretation and theology is correct, or not: if your interpretation is coherent, consistent and non-contradictory with all the Bible truths that are established from the text, from Genesis to Revelation. For example, the Calvinist interpretation of God's sovereignty as unilateral divine determinism, it's incoherent, inconsistent and contradictory with other clear Biblical truths, like God's love, holiness and goodness, God's nature and character, human moral responsibility and libertarian freedom (just to name a few). "To claim that each person’s eternal destiny is absolutely, unconditionally and eternally predetermined by God alone and also claim that each person, including the non-elect, are held responsible by God for their believing or not believing the gospel message (when it is God that ultimately foreordained if they would believe or not), is logical and moral nonsense, not “mystery.” There is nothing “apparently” contradictory about the Calvinist’s soteriology. It’s just contradictory in the plainest and fullest sense of the word. Again, C. S. Lewis is correct, “nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.” " Therefore, because God (and the Bible) can't be illogical, nonsensical and contradict Himself, the only logical conclusion is that the Calvinist interpretation of God's sovereignty as unilateral divine determinism is incorrect and false. Unfortunately and sadly, calvinists don't think so, and don't recognize this problem; they keep believing and proposing and teaching their interpretation and theology as true and correct, despite the incoherencies, inconsistencies and contradictions. That is why they have an hermeneutics of incoherence. Which is ironic, considering how much emphasis and importance they have on exegesis and proper biblical interpretation, isn't it?
Cerca 134 Here are just a few of the misrepresentations I have heard in this video: 1 Calvinists don't believe God is merciful, gracious and loving to all His creatures. He is not holding out His hands to sinful rebels [elect and non-elect]. 2. Calvinists believe in unconditional hardening for no reason. 3. Calvinists don't believe in a free and sincere offer of pardon and justification to all sinners without exception. 4. Calvinists believe in causal determininsm. 5. Calvinists believe God treats His creatures like robots or puppets. I could go on and on.
❤️❤️❤️ATTENTION JORDAN your friend may be looking for Doug Gustafson, who is a councillor that left Calvinism 2 years ago. The latest video from Beyond the Fundamentals features him talking about the negative effects Calvinism has had on some people.
JORDON, you should really team up with Kevin over at Beyond Freudian Fundamentals. Together you two can do the Flesh-o-gesis methodology of scripturial interpretation. He denies Gods effectual grace too. You should fit right in.
@@davevandervelde597 Kevin really needs to go into this worlds trade of being a psychologist or psychiatrist teaching Freudian manipulations. Listening to him for 2 minutes proves the truth of total depravity.
Calvinism is trivially easy to understand. Sproul, in _Chosen by God_, ascribes to Augustinian predestination - "in its most elementary form, is that our final destination, heaven or hell, is decided by God not only before we get there, but before we are even born." If one holds that statement as true, they are a Calvinist, even though the explanations and verbal gymnastics that follow can get rather complicated. The "you don't understand Calvinism" canard is a defense mechanism against Calvinistic propositions stated in an unpalatable, or non-sympathetic, way.
I appreciate this video and other videos like it pointing out how damaging Calvinism is. However, I would say that the doctrine itself is what 1 Timothy 4:1 warns us about in the end times about doctrines of demons and 2 Cornithians 11:4 and Galations 1:8 saying anyone who preaches a false gospel be under God’s curse. I have seen firsthand how damaging this doctrine is where they convince people that Jesus didn’t even die for the sins of everyone but limited atonement and only died for the elect. I wish more people would just be bold about it and call it the heresy that it is.
Great video and testimony. Keep up the good work!! I heard him talk about how Calvinist use John 6:44, to teach All who God the father draws He will give to the Son and the Son will lift them up on the last day. They mean to use this to prove that God effectually calls or draws the elect to salvation. They were predestined, predetermined to be saved according to Calvinism using amoung others, this verse. To my Calvinist brothers I ask with all due respect ... Is the drawing done by the calling of the father and is this to save them or not? If yes its to save, then Why did Christ have to die? If the decision was already made? That interpretation makes the death of Christ unnecesary. If its not to save them; then you can't say God the father is only drawing the elect. Because this wouldn't be an effectual drawing of those the Father gives to the Son, by an effectual calling to salvation. Here's the problem in other words: If God has predestined people before the foundation of the world, as Calvinist also teach, and then these people need God the Father to call them or draw them, give them life and faith for salvation, to then give them to the son, and that decision - To Do All That, was made before they existed, or even did anything good or bad, then Christ death and resurection was really unnecesary. I could be wrong, but why would I be wrong? Im open to clarity. God bless and thank you.
I admire the passion. You got some solid intuition in the right direction there. But I would offer some pushback. I can say, as a former Calvinist here, that what you are lacking in that critique is the emphasis on retributive justice in Calvinistic framework. God Must punish sin, or else He is not a perfectly just God. That is why Christ had to die in the Calvinist view; to receive the punishment for the elect, on an individual level, to substitute for their individual sins before God. Past present and future sins. All sins for that individual. Which is the reason for a particular atonement that is limited to the elect. It's the flow of TULIP itself that answers your objection here. You need to start further back. Go after the very definition of justice, and what Mercy and Grace are, in relation to justice. Study different atonement theories in church history. Penal Substitution is Not the only, or even necessarily the primary theory of atonement. Some would argue that is isn't even a proper understanding of God's character. Some food for thought.
@@joshuadavidson7985 Thank you for the insight. I have been studying scriptures for several years, including some formal systematic theology studies, several years ago. But I won't pretend to be a theologian, Im far from it. I have lots to learn!! But under channels like this, and others, including RC, Piper, I have come to understand a lot of the Calvinist position. I really appreciate your push back. I get your point and will give mine further though and weight on those points left out. There's so much to say, but to be practical we must limit our thoughts in these comment spaces. In regards to justice. I agree perhaps a framing of justice, mercy, grace is merited. Specially in regards to how they play into election... I mean, before the foundation of the world God the father, has abondond, ignored and left the non elect to their vices before they did anything good or bad, so I would also ask, How is that justice if they had not sinned? Adams fall was not a thing when the decision was made. How is the choosing of the elect, and the condemnation of the others service justice if God the Father made the decision, before anyone did anything good or bad (Rom 9)? This was the underlining position in my original comment. I may need to work on framing it better. But im sure you get the point. Be blessed Josh, thank you again. Keep up the good work in sharpening us up to defend the faith and give reason to why we believe.
@@chrscr3sp0 yes. It is Much more direct to implicate God with being unjust for that manner of election than it is to ask why Jesus had to die. I think that is the right track. Once you confront the notion of Federal Headship of Adam and an inherited guilt in Adam, you see the fragmentation of the thought beginning to happen. Go back to Genesis 3. Find a place where the text says Adam or Eve were cursed. You can see the Serpent getting cursed for sure. You can see God curse the ground for our sakes, but where was the text that says or even implies that Adam was cursed with a reprobate progeny who will only be able to reject God from now on, BY DESIGN. this is not an arbitrary side effect. It is a curse from God. A judgement. Therefore our Depravity and inability were HIS call. HIS design. And for what? My co-host (Tyler Fowler) and I have had YEARS of this discussion, as I came out of Calvinism 6ish years ago, and he came out of it at the end/the beginning of this year. It's a time investment, and a real labor of love to contend with someone on these topics and really change their mind. Keep your head up! It is all worth it later!
Every Christian was created in Christ, chosen before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4, 2:10) called as “a chosen race, a royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9, cf. Hebrews 5:4), and was also in Christ as our federal head and representative when He died and rose again (Romans 6:1-14; Colossians 2:12; 3:1-2). According to 1 Corinthians 1:9, those whom the Father has given to the Son (John 6:37) are brought into union with Christ when they are effectually called (cf. John 6:44) and embrace Christ by faith; faith being the fruit and justification of salvation (Galatians 5:22-23, Romans 3:28, 5:1, John 20:31). Our faith in Him is the effect and definite result of the work of God (John 6:29, Hebrews 12:2, Philippians 1:6); it is “not of ourselves” (Ephesians 2:8-9), because it could never be (Romans 8:7); the wicked do not even have the right to covenant with God (Psalm 50:16), therefore faith is something that we receive from God (2 Peter 1:1); only then does 1 Corinthians 1:30 become true of us: “and because of him you are in Christ Jesus.” Essentially, faith is a product of man’s fellowship with God, and it is the means of mediation initiated by God through which the Mediator works to save those whom He has both chosen and called, bringing about our sanctification (Acts 26:18). Think of our union with Christ as a coin with two sides. From the divine side, our union with Christ is secured by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit who is the bond of that eternal union (1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 1:13-14). From the human side, the bond of our union with Christ is the Spirit-granted faith (Philippians 1:29, Acts 13:48) that embraces Him as He is presented to us in the gospel (cf. Acts 5:14; Romans 16:7b, Philippians 3:9). The power (the Spirit) to believe comes from God; but the act (faith) is our act, though it is guaranteed for and given by the Lord to His elect (after all, we possess the gifts that He has given us, this includes faith). Until we believe, we are outside of Christ, and we must believe to enjoy the full benefits of salvation that He has purchased for His elect.
I am right there with you, leaving the church my grandpa built that I have a lot of history with, that's being pastored by a childhood friend who's a Calvinist, and not a moderate Calvinist, he's a high or hyper Calvinist.
35:00 AMEN... "1 John 2:1-2 reveals: “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father - Jesus Christ, the Righteous One"... In Calvinism, for whom is Jesus Christ 'advocating'? The 'elect', (as defined by Calvinism), need no advocate. Surely God does not need to be reminded of those whom he has already, unchangeably predestined to spend eternity with him! And, the unfortunate reprobate who is destined to eternal damnation is denied any advocacy.🤔🤔 So... for whom does Jesus advocate, and why? And, how can a Calvinist be consistent with his doctrine and lay claim to Heb 4:16? "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.", Never knowing for certain he is actually 'elect' and entitled to mercy, he is denied within the parameters of TULP of having any confidence of the right to even approach God for mercy... let alone to "come BOLDLY to the throne of grace"... he doesn't even know if he is supposed to be there at all. The purpose of Calvinism, by design, is to rob the believer of any confidence they are truly loved by God and undermine the relationship with our Heavenly Father which Jesus gave his life to make possible. Augustine and John Calvin did not 'design' it. They believed the lie sent from the one who did.
LOL. We do need an advocate as Hebrews tells us Jesus is the High Priest of believers. Straw man fallacy much? The Christian life of the elect occurs in time and space. Geez...You have an issue with the writer of Hebrews who teaches that Christ's work as high priest is definite and co-extensive do ya eh? hehheeeee You are denying the word of God here. Those for whom Christ sacrificed for are the ones he is an advocate/intercessor for! If he died for each and every, why doesn't he in John 17 pray for each and every? Scripture over your baseless assertions.
@@SugoiEnglish1 No Straw Man. Calvinism is in perpetual conflict with the very passage you reference. Yes, Jesus is a believer's High Priest. BUT, if Calvinism is true, the numbers of those who are "elected to be saved" from before the foundation of the world are set in eternity past and can neither be added to or diminished. Created, or chosen, as vessels of 'honor', they are NEVER in peril of damnation. Their salvation is by God's decree alone, and this has absolutely nothing to do with anything they will ever do. As defined by Calvinism, the "elect" quite literally need no " Advocate". Why does scripture say we need an advocate?.... Because Calvinism is not true. Have you been guaranteed Calvinism's necessary "Gift of Perseverance?... NO. In Calvinism, can you be saved without it? ...NO. Do you 'get it' because an 'advocate' defends you? ...NO. Could you 'lose it' without having an advocate? .... NO. Is it ever possible to know if you certainly "have it" before you die? ...NO If you are NOT 'truly elect', do any promises in the Bible apply to you? ...NO. A 'thinking' Calvinist cannot even read the 23rd Psalm with confidence and find comfort. Because if they're not "truly" elect it can mean nothing to them except wishful thinking. A primary tenant of Calvinism is that "regeneration' always precedes faith". Calvinism contends that men only believe because they are saved. They are NOT saved "because they believe". That claim is unsupported anywhere in scripture. It is unbiblical.
That's funny. I was actually going to message you today to get Jason's contact info. I listened to your live video with him last night and really enjoyed it!
Cerca 52:00 We don't care what you believe. Feel free to shout it from the house top. You have as much right to be wrong as we have to be right. All we ask is that you begin to accurately represent what we believe in the same way we accurately represent what you believe.
I just an email today (in Chinese) addressing me as a pastor (how do they know me?) and inviting me to view some great conference on youtube...I had no idea who it was from or who the group was, I suspected it was the Chinese cult "Church of Almighty god", but I clicked on the YT link and it was in Korea, so I figured out pretty quickly it was the 新天地 (new heaven and earth) cult. Anyway, I heard you mention in the video you do a lot of work dealing with the S. Korean cults. Just wanted to say, they are in Jakarta, Indonesia alive and well and recruiting from the Chinese speaking pastors here! Crazy stuff! blessings.
1:46:36 I don't think you're out of line for refusing spiritual mentorship from someone who holds to a belief system different than yours. As a Provisionist, I wouldn't want a Calvinist as a mentor, just as I wouldn't want a Calvinist as a pastor.
Calvinism does not have a gospel and most of Evangelical arminianism does not have a God was in Christ conciliating until you understand Union with Christ
I completely agree that the theology and soteriology of Calvinism is a complete lie that steals the peace that people can have that Christ died for them and loves them. I have been a Christian for over 20 years and Calvinism was a dark cloud over me all those years. I was never a Calvinist but hearing of the doctrine as an early Christian made me seriously doubt my faith. It wasn’t until I finally faced these issues head on, by the grace, mercy and direction from the Holy Spirit, and came to know it was false, that I could finally have a deep and meaningful life changing relationship with our Lord a Jesus Christ. Thank you all for ministry and testimony. ❤️
The gospel is not 'come and serve me' it's believe that Christ died for your sins, was buried, and rose again (for your justification). BELIEVE that and you're saved. Please don't complicate or muddle the gospel with works.
Why do those who leave following one "mans teaching" (calvin) and jump to some other man's teaching (Armenian or other). Every one of these men is faulty. Why not just follow Christ, His word as the Holy Spirit teaches you. All these men attempt to explain spiritual matters in a natural way.(in the flesh) stop with the labels.... didnt Paul take care of this when he reprimanded those following men? (Some follow Cephas, others Appolos....) seriously... so annoying.
Calvinism has been around since Genesis 3. "Did God really say?" It was renamed by people who were impressed by John Calvin's deception but it was defined in the 1st century by a letter from Luke in which he recounts the heartbreaking story of the apostle Paul telling his Ephesian brothers and sisters that they would not seemhim again BUT, to be on the look out for ravenous wolves who are going to infiltrate their flock will want to 'kill' their faith through deception. Calvinism and reformed theology is evil and demonic and that is why these heretics go after 'young sheep' who have just converted and lure them by their lies. Calvinists don't share the Gospel with the world, they decieve weak Christians. May God have mercy on their souls when they stand before the Lord and Judge and He asks them, "Did you share with everyone you meet that I died for them?"(John 3:16-17) "Well, jesus, humm, let's see, we thought we were 'special'!
I can't believe this guy thinks he ever understood Calvinism. It sounds as if he was involved with hyper-Calvinists. No Calvinist would ever deny that sinners are responsible for our sins or affirm that we are deterministically determined [caused] to sin.
Any Calvinists would have known that Romans 5 is not talking about all sinners but about all believers. All sinners do not have the Holy Spirit poured out into their hearts as evidence of God's redeeming and justifying love. All believers do.
I went from non-denominational to Calvinist. I saw verses and passages differently than i did. I reached a point where i couldnt ignore the passages about predestination. Also, learning about Divine Simplicity, Immutability, Omniscience, etc. helped me to solidify my belief that Calvinism is correct. Starting with God first puts a different perspective on things.
@@mattyb496 How about the verses that declare if you're not born again from above by Gods grace and given a entirely new nature in the image of Christ....you remain 100% in your first birth nature and going to hell? Does that clear it up?
@@chrscr3sp0 What i meant by putting God first is starting with God and then reasoning down to man as opposed to starting with man and reasoning to God. I start with what I know about God (omniscient, sovereign, immutable, etc.). A lot of times i see people start with their feeling or that they couldn't believe something because something happened in their life. From my viewpoint, I dont see how one gets around theological determinism. I think one has to start to deny (maybe not knowingly) fundamental things about God if one denies theological determinism. I'm not saying that makes one condemned, I simply think they are wrong. My wife is not a Calvinist nor is my pastor, so I have nothing against other Christians. Grace and peace to you
Its a major pyschological trip for sure. I got to the point of having to think other people dont really exist or that im being tested in a world of matrix or ultimately im at the state of thinking the only alternative is universal reconciliation. But the horrific mind trip to think i must believe in a God who might even be predestining infants to hell etc and to the point of thinking i may not be able to be a Christian anymore if thats who God truly is. His character is being defamed by the end results of calvinism taken to the logical conclusions.
God holds Pastors and teachers more responsible for teaching false doctrine than He does new believer for believing false doctrine. I do not feel sorry for believers such as Justin Peters who has hardened his heart to the gospel. I am kind to him, but his behavior is disgusting. Armenians believe that you can lose your salvation. I call what is being talked about here traditional Christianity.
Jordan, Why don't you have someone on who understands what we believe? If you imagine cerca 18:00 that Calvinists believe God does anything to push sinners away or to keep them from believing, you never understood Calvinism. It might help you to read a few Calvinist's commentaries on Romans 10:21. I can provide some of those quotes if you like
Early in the interview when this second part of the verse was mentioned: Romans 8:34b (HCSB) …He [Jesus] also is at the right hand of God and intercedes for us. It made me wonder why a Calvinist would ever cite this verse, or even these references: 1 John 2:1b (HCSB) …But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father - Jesus Christ the Righteous One. Hebrews 7:25b (HCSB) …He always lives to intercede for them [believers]. Why do I say this? Because, if someone is “chosen” according to how Calvinism defines being chosen, it does not make sense to me as to why Jesus would ever need to intercede on the behalf of someone who was predetermined to be in Christ before the foundation of the world. In other words, the elect need an advocate in heaven to defend them before God, even though God elected them? 🤨
Cerca 1:20 Perhaps it would help you to notice that Jesus did not say "you [hardened sinners] cannot come to me apart from the Father's drawing." He said, "NO ONE can come to me unless the Father draws him and I will raise him up again at the last day." Everyone drawn will be raised on the last day. The text does not say everyone who responds properly to the drawing will be raised to life on the last day.
It doesn't matter who the objector is in Romans 9. Only Flowers and his ilk can imagine that it does. The text still states that God has the sovereign right to show mercy to whom He wills and harden whom he wills and affirms that no one resists His will [of decree in this case].
Jordan, If you honestly have any desire to know what Calvinists actually believe, why don't you have me on your channel for a discussion of these issues?
At 1:27:11, he quotes from John 12:32 where he seems to think that God draws absolutely everyone without exception. This notion is demonstrably false. In John 12:20, we see that Greeks have just been brought to Jesus to hear Him teach, and now that He is in the presence of both Jews AND Gentiles, in verse 32, He declares “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all to Myself;” he doesn’t say “all men,” (“all men” is a poor English translation) as if to indicate absolutely everyone without exception, but rather, in the Greek, He simply says “all.” We also see that Jesus did not meet with the Greeks at this time because He said that His drawing will occur after He is lifted up, after all, Jesus declared that “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). When Jesus said that He would draw “all” to Himself, we know that Jesus could not possibly have been teaching that His cross will draw absolutely everyone without exception because “the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing” (1 Corinthians 1:18, 23), so we see that there are some for whom the cross does not draw, but repel. Rather, this “all” refers to “all different categories,” that is, both Jews AND Gentiles (cf. Acts 13:48, 15:13-18), since it was to both Jews AND Gentiles that Jesus was now speaking, and we see this in the indefinite pronouns that He used: “all” (vs 32), “everyone” (vs 46), and “anyone” (vs 47); this concept is revisited all over the New Testament (cf. Revelation 5:9). The concept that Christ taught that salvation was for both Jews and Gentiles took Peter a while to grasp, and indeed, God had to give him a vision in order that he would grasp the concept in Acts 10:9-16 and 34-35. Here, he learns that “God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.” Pay special attention to the phrase, “every nation.” God is not the God of the Jews only, but of Gentiles also (Romans 3:29, Isaiah 49:6). So how can we be certain that the “all” here doesn’t refer to absolutely everyone without exception? If John 12:32 was intended to teach that Jesus draws to Himself “absolutely everyone without exception,” then that would be blatant universalism since we read in John 6:44 that Jesus will raise up ALL who are drawn to Him; that would mean that hell is empty, and that no one escapes being drawn into salvation with Him, and that position denies all that Jesus taught about hell.
@@apilkey Straw man. No one ever said that drawing equals salvation. But, since Jesus raises up all who are drawn, drawing DOES lead to salvation. Go read John 6.
@@apilkey I re-read my original comment three times, nowhere did I say that drawing equals salvation. Either you misread my comment, or you are a liar.
@@lawrencestanley8989 You said, “So how can we be certain that the “all” here doesn’t refer to absolutely everyone without exception? If John 12:32 was intended to teach that Jesus draws to Himself absolutely everyone without exception then that would be blatant universalism since we read in John 6:44 that Jesus will raise up ALL who are drawn to Him.” You’re equating John 6:44 with God raising up all who are drawn so you’re equating drawing with universalism. You’re wrong either way. God raises up those who come to Christ and believe and are born again. That’s not universalism sorry keep trying but you’re wrong (again).
So painful to listen to how he understands determinism, assurance, sanctification and missions, God’s love. It may surprise him to learn many Calvinists do hold to a universal love of God even for the non-elect. Personally I don’t, but most would subscribe to a common grace given to everyone without exception. A legitimate issue with Calvinism is that many do caricature it due to misunderstanding and run off on a tangent. This isn’t unique to Calvinism as I can give you just as many anecdotes for other theologies that people have misused due to their fallen natures and abused. Sad.
We cannot try to create God in what we perceive as " fair" His ways ARE NOT our ways. His thoughts ARE NOT our thoughts. Don't try to push HIM into your concepts of fair . . HE receives ALL the GLORY and HE doesn't care if you think HIS thoughts and ways are unfair. Who are we to reply against Him????
James White is correct that Jesus was pronouncing judgment on official Jerusalem. The verse should never be made to mean that sinners are able to frustrate God's purpose. The issue of God's desire for sinners to repent is another issue altogether.
At 1:19:31, are you suggesting that Pharaoh was hardened because of his response to the Father? The scriptures tell us that He didn't even know about Yahweh (Exodus 5:2), so how could he respond to him one way or the other?
Calvinists who understand the doctrine don't worry about our election. Whether God has chosen us our not is His business and not ours. Our concern is whether we have truly believed. That should not be a concern only for Calvinists but for everyone who has professed faith in Christ
Cerca 50:00 Perhaps you can enlighten us concerning verses you think we have not considered in their biblical, theological, historical and cultural contexts. There are not Calvinistic verses and synergists' verses. We seek to understand every verse in the light of every other biblical verse.
At 14:11, we see demonstrated here his misunderstanding of "Irresistible Grace" which is but a caricature, which he rightly rejects. His misunderstanding casts doubt on his assertion that he was a Calvinist for 20 years. If he was, then he didn't understand it then, and he doesn't understand it now. The saving grace of God is effectually applied only to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and, in God's timing, He overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. Note that the doctrine does NOT hold that absolutely every influence of God's Holy Spirit cannot be resisted (cf. Acts 7:51, 2 Chronicles 36:15-16, Isaiah 50:2, 65:12, 66:4, Proverbs 1:24, Jeremiah 7:13, Hosea 11:3-5), but rather that those whom God has chosen to save cannot resist the Holy Spirit effectively, that the Holy Spirit is able to overcome all resistance and make his influence irresistible and effective. Thus, when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved. (John 6:37,39,44-45,65) This answers his request at 1:26:22 where he wants to be shown that "they can resist until they can't resist."
At 1:20:37, in Matthew 13, Jesus taught the parable of the sower in which only the seed that was sown on good soil yielded a crop - and how does one have good soil? It must be prepared beforehand. Ephesians 2:10 - For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. The saints are the workmanship of Jesus, that is, we are wholly the result of God who has created us for the purpose of redemption (“in Christ Jesus”) and for sanctification, "for good works," and “so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us.” (Cf. 2 Corinthians 5:21, Ephesians 1:4, Philippians 1:6, 2:13, Colossians 1:16) According to Ezekiel 36:22, God acts for His own sake to give His people a new heart and a new spirit (verse 26), which causes them to walk in His ways and do His judgments (verse 27). The cause and effect order here is very important.
I love both these guys. I havent finished watching yet but just to make a comment as I hear this at the 30 minute mark. I have 57 years of reformed upbringing and studied this extensively. I think I have a real clear view of this. There are differents degrees of calvistic doctrine. It sounds like JP. is describing a hype view which I am very aware is out there. I have never ever been taught to ask myself to question if I am elect. That is not taught by anyone (Sproul,MacArthur,Piper, or any couple dozen more I could name) and is not applicable. It is also not asked of anyone else. This is one huge reason this is getting the misrepresentation it does get. Jordan I think once again saying the "implications of calvinism " is just not honest. One other point is that it always sounds like non reformed believers have no times they question their faith. This is not what you are saying but it is how it sounds. I know its not easy to make these but it has to be balanced. 😊
I think the difference isn’t that Christians who are “non-reformed” don’t have times of doubt and questioning of their faith, it more has to do with whether or where assurance is found in each view. It appears Calvinism itself can cause more doubt and isn’t able to provide complete or lasting assurance because of the doctrine itself.
@@PrudenceMcFrugal There can only be assurance in salvation in the Reformed doctrines of grace theology. No Self Determinist can ever trust wholeheartedly in their salvation because it centers on their Self.
@PrudenceMcFrugal That is how this should be framed and discussed. Thank you. How does the Bible teach us to have assurance in what Christ has done for us. This video makes it sound 1-sided.
@@davevandervelde597 The problem the Calvinist has is their claim that God only 'truly' loves the "elect" as they define election. However, nobody knows for sure who these lucky folk are.... and they cannot know for certain if they will receive the 'gift of Perseverance' Augustine said is necessary and only given to the truly 'elect'. Since they teach their own belief is only by God's decree, likewise, it's also God who decreed the the actions of those who eventually abandon their profession of faith and deny Christ. If their doctrine is true.... and God does it to some people... (Calvin called it "evanescent/temporary/false faith), they can never know for certain if he's doing it to them in their sleep tonight. They actually end up worshiping a God who cannot be trusted to love any one specific individual. Dr. Sproul asked people to pray he would "die in the "faith"... but, ironically, what good would the prayer do if he was never really 'picked' in the first place.🤔 Dr. Sproul admitted there is no assurance of one's own salvation afforded in Calvinism.
@@PrudenceMcFrugal Yes, doubts of one's salvation... and, "how do I know I am truly 'elect'?" is probably the most common question at Q&A sessions in Calvinist/Reformed seminars. They 'dance' around it all the time, but really have no answer, only commiseration. They always encourage people to examine their lives, and their Christian 'activities'... i.e., "Works", in search of some sense of evidence they are saved... but can never know if it's 'enough'... Ultimately, they cling to their works a planks from a sinking ship. Having already explained away all the passages about believing in Christ to one's own salvation, it's all they have.
You seem to be arguing that Calvinism cannot be true because some weird people have misunderstood the doctrine and reacted wrongly. Where is the biblical exegesis?
Perhaps when you talk about hardening as the reason people reject the gospel, you might wish to ask yourself how these people were reacting to God's self-disclosure prior to their hardening. They were not hardened for no reason.
The whole thing about sin was just really weird. The guy clearly had zero grounding in the Doctrine of God, which I conclude from him seeming to think of God as some big man in the sky even when he was talking about his time as a Calvinist.
This guy doesn't even seem to have a clue what Calvinists believe. If he thinks that Calvinists deny that sinners resist the overtures of God's mercy, he never understood Calvinism at all. I am 15 minutes into this video and have not heard a shred of bibilical exegesis yet.
I’ve only been comforted by knowing that God has everything under control, that nothing catches him by surprise, and that all things actually do work for the good of those who love God. IMO, the only way Calvinism can destroy lives is from really bad teaching and really bad understanding, which the latter I am hearing in this discussion. I have to agree with the other commenter that said it seems what’s being portrayed here is a hyper Calvinism, a very harsh hyper view at that.
@jordandthornburg A hyper calvinist view is closer to the athiest view of determinism. Causing all things, therefore, mans ability to choose is zero ,or fatalism. This is were Jordan and others are not able to get over that stumbling block and continue to make people believe that is what calvinism is. It is not. Theistic determinism is were God has given his creation and specifically man the ability to choose and be fully culpable for those choices. But all that happens not appart from Gods plan but together with Gods plan. God is not just outside of creation responding to it but simultaneously in His creation bringing about His sovereign decree. If this was not true God could never make a promise and we could not believe He could keep it.
_"l've only been comforted by knowing that God has everything under control"_ All Christians believe this. But I do agree that Calvinists feel comfort in knowing that God is the one who willed, decreed, and meticulously controlling every sin and evil they commit. _"IMO, the only way Calvinism can destroy lives is from really bad teaching and really bad understanding,"_ False! Calvinism destroys lives because that's what God willed, decreed, and brought to pass. _"what's being portrayed here is a hyper Calvinism"_ Nope. It's consistent Calvinism.
Perhaps you need to consider the question Paul asked seriously. Who are you to reply against God? It is not our task to make God look good to atheists.
At 1:32:40, mysteriously holding men accountable? While God is properly said to ordain, and thus be the ultimate cause of all things (Ephesians 1:11, Romans 11:36, James 4:13-15) -even evil- (cf. Revelation 17:17, 2 Samuel 12:11-12, 1 Kings 22:19-23 / 2 Chronicles 18:18-22) He is never the proximate, or efficient cause of evil, and scripture regards only the proximate or efficient cause of evil as the chargeable or blameworthy party. In the following passages, we see God actively determining, decreeing, setting, predestining, or sending men to perform an action, and for those men who are doing what God has set them to do, it is a sin, an evil act, and they could not have done otherwise; God is in control of the men performing the action, and yet He is innocent of sin, and those performing the sinful actions are morally accountable for sin: Genesis 50:20, Job 1:13-15, 17, 21, Isaiah 10:5-6, Judges 9:22-23, 1 Samuel 2:25, 16:14, 18:10, 19:9, 2 Samuel 12:11-12, Psalm 105:24-25, Proverbs 16:4, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12, 1 Peter 2:8-10, Romans 9:22, Acts 2:22-23, 4:27-28.
You ARE obsessed with calvin. Just know if you ARE saved --- God chose you. You did not choose HIM on your own corrupt " free will" Only evil continually God says
I would certainly identify with Calvin and most of his theology but I listen to you in order to understand your position. I am not in any way fearful that i may hear something that may debunk what i believe to be true. And if what you are saying aligns with scripture then so be it! It seems that the "non-calvinist" are viewing scripture through a lens that skews what it actually says. For instance John 3:16 Says "whosoever believes", it does not say whosoever will believe in any translation I can find... when your experience, which should always be suspect, aligns with what scripture says it causes one to take notice... I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I have nothing to do with my conversion, it was simply a response to what the Lord had done in my life. Blessings to you all
Scripture and my experience align as well. The issue is: are you interpreting both properly? Also Romans 10:13 says whosoever. I don’t think it’s much of a point, respectfully.
@@jordandthornburg Read down 3 verses. "Believing" is not an action or workings of the free will of man. Romans 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
Cerca132:30 You really need to stop misquoting that passage from Calvin and read the rest of the treatise. I have provided several quotes from Calvin that show that he did not affirm what you are claiming. You seem willing to lie rather than accurately represent what Calvin actually wrote. Shame on you.
It's not that you don't understand Calvinism, it's that you don't understand who God is. He is infinite and the finite cannot comprehend the infinite. All anecdotal arguments mean nothing.
Sadly, Calvinism is in direct contradiction to hundreds of simple-to-understand verses that God chose to reveal about Himself. Sadly, By definition, you don’t believe God’s Word that He gave us so we would know Him. If you reject God’s definitions of Himself, sadly, you may find yourself worshiping a different god and proclaiming a different gospel. Specific simple verses you don’t believe (by definition) 1 Timothy 2:3b-4A(ESV) …God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved… If you set aside your Calvinist dictionary (anti-biblical definition of sovereignty) and read the words on the page, this passage absolutely contradicts Calvinism. Another passage: Jeremiah 19:4b-5 (ESV) because they have filled this place with the blood of innocents, and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind. God explicitly states that He did not decree these abominations NOR DID THEY COME TO MY MIND. The word ‘Sovereignty’ is not even in the Bible. A Biblical definition of God’s control MUST not contradict these verses. Jesus held the Pharisees accountable for their cognitive dissonance (which Jesus called hypocrisy). God created logic, which declares that cognitive dissonance (believing contradictory things simultaneously) is simply a lie.
So when God shows up as a man and dwells among us and gets crucified, you're unable to comprehend that? God is personable and relatable. You're right the infinite is impossible to understand but he provides a way.
God will NOT share HIS glory with another. HE MUST choose to save some. We were reprobate --- ONLY evil continually. Just accept the pure word--- quit OBSESSING with calvin. It's evil to give glory to calvin
And don’t get me wrong, nobody has to be a Calvinist in order to be a Christian, but all of these horrible takes and asserting perceived entailments are just bad. Have me on Jordan, ask me questions about Calvinism, perhaps I can help get a better idea of what it entails. Reject it for what it is and not some caricature built in your own mind.
I've been watching a good number of these videos lately, and I must respectfully say that (despite how cliche or predictable this may sound) I find myself often wondering what kind of reformed theology have these guys grown up with? Secondly, these folks act like they discovered something new that has never been seen before or has never been thoroughly dealt with time and again, over the centuries. Third, the conclusions they run to with some of these passages are positions that even most Arminians wouldn't even hold to and don't. Fourth, I notice a pattern of drawing human analogies and trying to apply them to God. That is foolish and (whether intentional or not) pushes God down to man's level and forces Him to abide by the same rules and limitations that we are bound to. And finally, I notice a consistent theme of a need to not feel bad about God's sovereignty and make salvation palatable to us. The lengths to which some of these videos go to eliminate God's sovereign choice and exalt man's free will is rather disturbing to me. It reminds me of what Jehovah's Witnesses do to eliminate a Trinitarian framework from their view of Scripture. They'll quote a battery of verses that "clearly" show how Jesus can't be God and then accuse the Trinitarian of twisting those clear verses to fit their Trinitarian tradition. That is a foolish way to approach Scripture. It takes an understanding of the WHOLE of revelation to begin to see how it all holds together harmoniously. This is not to be confused with the belief that it will all fall into place, according to our human understanding and eliminate all questions. There will always be an element of the unknowable when it comes to the character of God and how He is bringing about His perfect plan of redemption. But there will never be inconsistency in the testimony of Scripture. The kind of theological conundrums we're left with in a provisionist/synergistic theological framework are rather significant, IMO and need to be dealt with. I don't see any of these video doing that. Once we eliminate God the capricious ogre, we seem to think that this fixes everything and that is far from the truth. I'm REALLY giving serious thought to releasing a video or two that, in sort of a quick and concise way, get right to the heart of the most common misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and misapplications that I see popping up again and again in these videos. The only thing that makes me hesitant is the fact that explanations and refutations of what I see in these videos already exist in abundance by men far more learned than myself, so what difference would it make if I added mine?
I think it is good to continue to offer the explanation you did. What we see all the time is a misrepresentation and then a conclusion that often is not accurate. You are right on the money, a faulty character of God seems to be how non reformed views are trying to understand a reformed position. I see all the same few people responding regularly ( of course, I am one) but it is good to help those whi are reading and not commenting
And the worst part about Calvinism is that you actually believe that God is the one behind everything you're complaining about. He's the one who decreed and is meticulously controlling everything these guys say, think, and believe, and there's nothing these guys can do about what God decreed for them to believe and think.
@@gk.4102 Nonensical, untrue, baseless snark doesn't get us any further, but hey, if it gets you off, clearly that's what matters to you. Your snide rhetoric demonstrates a dangerous combination of arrogance and ignorance. Whatever you may think of me, I'm sincerely trying to bring to light gross category errors that distort truth, while you congratulate yourself for being clever. Take it some place else, would you please?
At 39:51 we see yet another misunderstanding of Calvinism. When Calvin spoke of what is often called double-predestination, he didn't mean what you think he meant. The term "double predestination" itself is often used in a misleading and ambiguous fashion. Some use it to mean nothing more than the view that the eternal destiny of both elect and reprobate is settled by the eternal decree of God. In that sense of the term, all genuine Calvinists hold to "double predestination"-the fact that the destiny of the reprobate is eternally decreed is clearly a biblical doctrine (1 Peter 2:8; Romans 9:22; Jude 4). But more often, the expression "double predestination" is employed as a pejorative term to describe the view of those who suggest that God is just as active in keeping the reprobate out of heaven as He is in getting the elect in. (There's an even more sinister form of "double predestination," which suggests that God is as active in making the reprobate evil as He is in making the elect holy.)
This view (that God is as active in reprobating the non-elect as He is in redeeming the elect) is more properly labeled "equal ultimacy" (cf. R.C. Sproul, Chosen by God, 142). It is actually a form of hyper-Calvinism and has nothing to do with true, historic Calvinism. God is not “predestinating” anyone to hell as if He is actively working within the lives of the reprobate to ensure their damnation (this idea is known as equal ultimacy), and thereby making them evil in the process. Instead, what He is doing by granting eternal life to a chosen few, and actively working within their lives to ensure their salvation, is to allow the remainder to perish, here, He takes His hands off (Isaiah 63:17, 64:7), and leaves the rest of mankind to the unintended consequences brought about by their willful rebellion against God, and God will justly condemn them to hell for their sins.
I listened for the first 23 mins, sorry I had to pause. All the actor said is I think, maybe, my perception of etc. There is nothing to learn except his feelings and personal perception why he left calvinism. True there are 2 kinds of calvinists or reformed in my opinion - Confused and Enlightened. Those who leave are confused! There is no serious exegesis why he thinks calvinism/Reformed theology is wrong. He mentioned the grace of God is resistible because the Pharisees resisted it. Of course it is foolishness and a stumbling block to them because they were blind and deceived. Here is the proof - 1 Corinthians 2:7-8 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. The gospel was a mystery hidden from them, Herod, Pilate, the Pharissees, the Jews Acts 4:28 or they would not have crucified the Lord.... Then He mentions Rom 2:4 that the patience and kindness of God is intended to lead you to repentance but it is not irresistible because the following verse says in their stubborness and unrepentant heart, they were storing up wrath in the day of God's wrath. I am reformed and this is what we believe. 1 Cor 1:18, 1 Cor 2:14, the message of the cross is foolishness to the perishing (unregenerates who will naturally reject it because it is only understood by Spirit revelation) but it is the power of God unto salvation (salvation is solely the work and byproduct of the power of God) Until the Father draws the spiritually dead, No one can come to me John 6:44. The world will continue to reject the preaching of the gospel, the testimony of the kindness and goodness of God until dead sinners are confronted by the power of God. Saul is a good example of a dead, deceived and depraved sinner who resisted Jesus until Jesus revealed Himself and confronted Him, the result salvation. Bottomline: It is a fallacy to use the Pharisees rejection and Rom 2:4 to prove his point that grace is resistible because unregenerates naturally resist God. Every unregenerate single person will resist the gospel initially until the power of God overcomes his resistance and draws him to salvation such as in the case of Saul. There is nothing offensive here because this is what we believe how God saves. Sorry, I cant finish 2 hours of this video after 23 mins of listening. I don't think the rest will be any conclusive....
@@ManassehJones Pentecostal church was my first church in 87. My first inclination those years were Arminianism due to human nature, rationalism. But as I started to study God's Word through the years, the Spirit opened my mind and understanding to Sovereign grace. Salvation is of the Lord from start to finish. I am what I am by the grace of God.
@@josephalvinalmedatv8 Glory to God. You now see how He used all of those experiences in your past to bring you to the Truth. Blessed be God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who called you by His grace.
Thanks bro. God bless you too. He called me into the ministry too 32 yrs now. Not really my first choice of career because He taught me persecution and the sufferings of Christ. But He showed me a beautiful lesson all to His glory.
@@josephalvinalmedatv8 God conforming you into the image of Christ is never joyous Brother, but grievous, but the end is the fruit of righteousness, His righteousness, Amen. Suffering the loss of ALL things, and counting them as dung, that Christ be your All in All. Glory to God. How blessed it is to be in fellowship with the beloved of God. Thanks for sharing. My testimony and witness is likewise a Sovereighn Divine Decree of God, from start to finish. Glory to God. Im going to follow you.
At 55:40, no... I realize that this is a popular assertion of men like Leighton Flowers, but it is demonstrably false. Who are the ones drawn in John 12? Are these merely good Jews, the Old Testament/pre-crucifixion, true followers of Yahweh, who are already in a relationship with the Father, that He then draws to the Son (John 6:44)? After all, Jesus does draw a distinction between the true followers and the pretenders in John 8:44 who only thought that their Father was God. Well, it certainly could include them, but by no stretch is it only limited to them, see John 10:14-16, 11:51-52. Well, Jesus said in John 6:45 that “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.” Note the phrase “heard and learned.” For some insight regarding “hearing and learning,” let’s observe John 12:29 - “So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it (the Father speaking from heaven) were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, “An angel has spoken to Him.” Now, after the Father speaks from heaven confirming that He has glorified His Name, and Jesus said that this was for the sake of those standing around Him (John 12:30), everyone standing around Jesus heard something, but not everyone who heard was able to discern what it was that they heard, so there are obviously two groups of people here - those who can hear and learn from the Father, and those who cannot. The ability to hear and learn from the Father is not an ability that everyone has, and this is obvious since there were some that claimed that what they heard was merely thunder. It was a smaller group from the whole however that had been given ears to hear, that is, to hear AND learn, who actually heard the words of the Father to learn from Him. So who is it that both “hears and learns?” John 8:47 - “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.” John 10:26 - But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep John 18:37 - “Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” Each of these phrases - “among my sheep,” “of God,” and “of the truth” - describes people before the Father gives them to Jesus. 1 - People are “among my sheep” or not, before they believe, because Jesus says that not being his sheep is why they “do not believe” (John 10:26). 2 - People are “of God” before they truly “[hear] the words of God,” because Jesus says that not being “of God” is why people don’t hear (John 8:47). 3 - People are “of the truth” before they “[listen] to my voice,” because Jesus says that being “of the truth” is why they listen (John 18:37). Here's the point. As we see in John 6:64-65 where Jesus gives an example of Judas as someone who would not believe, then He explains Judas’s unbelief by saying, “This is why [back in verse 44] I told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted him by the Father.” In other words, Judas did not believe because “no one can come to Me unless it is granted him from the Father” - implying that Judas was not granted this. Or, to use the words of verse 44, which Jesus is referring back to, the Father did not draw Judas. Being willing to come to Jesus is something God puts in a group of humans, which means that God did not choose a group of humans as His own because He saw in them a willingness to come to Jesus (or because He saw in them already a devotion to Yahweh). Whatever willingness humans have to come to Jesus is not the basis, but the result of belonging to the Father beforehand. To sum up: Jesus laid down His life for the sheep (John 10:14-16, cf. Ephesians 5:25-26). The Father gave us to Jesus (John 17:6). He drew us to Him (John 6:44), and we came to Him (John 6:37). He has kept us (John 17:12). And He will never cast us out (John 6:37). No one can snatch us out of His hand (John 10:28-29). And He will raise us from the dead at the last day (John 6:39). Before we belonged to Jesus, we belonged to the Father (John 17:6, 9). Before we listened to the truth, we belonged to the Father (John 8:47, 18:37). Before we believed, we belonged to the Father (John 10:26). Before we were drawn to the Son, we belonged to the Father (John 6:44, 65). We were His people before we believed, and that from both Jew and Gentile (Revelation 5:9).
At 30:35, you make the assertion that "God loves everybody." This is demonstrably false; if you claim to be a Christian who believes the Bible, this is not something that you can hold to: Psalm 5:5-6 - The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity. You destroy those who speak falsehood; the Lord abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit. Psalm 11:5 - The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul hates. Psalm 18:27 - For You save an afflicted people, but haughty eyes You abase. Psalm 101:5 - Whoever secretly slanders his neighbor, him I will destroy; no one who has a haughty look and an arrogant heart will I endure. Psalm 139:21-24 - Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; they have become my enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my anxious thoughts; and see if there be any hurtful way in me, and lead me in the everlasting way. *(Clearly, David felt that hating evil doers was synonymous with righteousness)* Proverbs 6:16-19 - There are six things which the LORD hates, yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, a false witness who utters lies, and one who spreads strife among brothers. *(In this terrifying passage, we see that God not only hates the wicked deeds that men do, but He hates the men that commit those wicked deeds)* *It has been said “love the sinner, hate the sin,” but that saying came from Gandhi, not God. In just the first 50 Psalms alone, 14 times we see God’s hatred and wrath for the sinner - God does not draw a line of separation between the unrepentant sinner and his sins.*
You notice that when you actually provide doctrinal truth and the verses there's crickets in the replies? That proves it's Truth. Irrefutable. Alls they can do is silently resist it because they cannot publically refute it. They run from the Light. John 3:20-21 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. [21] But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
@@ManassehJonesNone of those passages you mishandled prove God does not love everyone. In those passages you’ll find reference to the people Christ died for… SINNERS. For God so LOVED the world that He gave His only begotten So. While we were yet SINNERS Christ died for us. Question: Did Christ love those whom He died for? Yes or no? We’re those people sinners or righteous? Did Christ come for the righteous or the sinner?
@@apilkey Does God love you? That's most important, not if He loves everyone else. Jesus Christ came not but for "the lost Sheep of the house of Israel." Are you "Israel?" If you're not His Sheep, or from the house of Israel, He said Himself "I did not come for you."
At 1:21:14, no, not at all. Those who cannot hear are those who are not of God. John 8:47 - “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.” People are “of God” before they truly “[hear] the words of God,” because Jesus says that not being “of God” is why people don’t hear.
At 1:22:12, why God hardens hearts? Sure, I'll give you the Biblical reason. Though all men are totally depraved through the imputation of Adam’s sin (cf. Romans 5:12), “dead in their trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1-10, Colossians 2:8-15), and are unable to come to God apart from a supernatural working of the Holy Spirit (John 6:29, 37, 44, 65, Hebrews 12:2, Philippians 1:6), God’s continuous display of Himself to the reprobate mind brings about an ever increasing hostility towards God and anything associated with Him - this is precisely what we see with Pharaoh. When God demonstrated Himself through many signs and miracles, in each instance, Pharaoh grew increasingly hostile towards Moses to the point that after the 9th plague, Pharaoh threatened to kill Moses should he ever come before him again (Exodus 10:28). In abandoning the reprobate to their own fallen nature so that they may reap the unintended consequences that their own sinfulness produces, it is a means that God uses to direct the actions of sinful men through their own willful choices (Proverbs 16:9) so that they might be demonstrations of His wrath against sin and unrighteousness (Exodus 4:21-23).
Thank you, Jordan for having me on.
Very edifying
Were you born again from above and made a new creature in Christ by the grace of God alone before you became a Self Determinist? Or, was it after you rejected Gods grace alone and became a Self Determinist that you feel you were born again from above and made an entirely new creature in Christ?
Honest question.
PS. EDIT. Addition: Maybe you don't think you've been born again from above, yet. Thats option 3 I guess.
@@ManassehJones salvation is by grace through faith. God as always bestowed righteousness on those willing to believe. Check the list in Hebrews 11 it's not exhaustive, it is illustrative of the principal. God is not obligated to save anybody but he graciously saves those who believe
@@R.L.KRANESCHRADTT That's not what I asked "him." I asked him about new new birth. When was it.
I already know you're reprobate, nothing could be clearer than your worshipping the creature more than the Creator, and having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Promising news is that God chooses to save some reprobates, so until you take that last breath in the land of the living there still is hope He saves you.
@@ManassehJones Sorry Manny, your question didn't specify who the "him" was. But your question mentioned, "made a new creature in Christ by the grace of God alone"... Actually, it is not by Grace alone which is involved in salvation. God is gracious to save... but God only promises to save those willing to believe.... And the search for any scripture which says all men are "born" unable to believe came up empty.
Some will, some wont, but anyone can believe.... That's why they call it "Good News" for all men.
To quote a famous author ..... We are saved "By Grace Through Faith". Not Grace alone.
No sane person would 'boast' about receiving anything unearned and undeserved. Abraham's faith did not save him or make him righteous. Faith is not meritorious... but it is that to which God responds.
Remind me again what part of TULIP is it which you disavow?
At about the 45 minute mark you talked about what Calvinistic doctrine does to a person mentally and spiritually. Receiving biblical counseling from a Calvinistic perspective will cause great damage and pain!! I walked through three years of mental torture before I realized I had a theological difference with the church I was a member of for 29 years. I did not understand the ramifications of this belief system or that I sat under this teaching. I was locked in a system and didn't know. Understanding God's Word without the lens of Calvinism brought healing and growth in my relationship with Christ. If you're struggling with anything turn to Christ and run from any church that counsels from a Reformed/Calvinistic perspective. ACBC counseling which has invaded many churches is Calvinistic. Calvinism/determinism worked out will not lead a person to the God of Scripture. And I will speak to what happened to me - I could only see an unloving God who controlled everything and determined all that happened to me. If I didn't know how to surrender correctly or even what it looked like to surrender so I could walk with God correctly then I wasn't elect and I wasn't loved by God. The whole system when worked out truthfully will put someone in a pit so deep...only the grace of God climbing into the pit can get a person out. Calvinism is cruel unbiblical teaching that mars the very character of God.
Thank you for posting this important first-hand testimony.
How we view God and our relationship with Him is amongst the most important things, and Calvinism seems to implicate God as the villain. We know from The Holy Bible that He isn't.
❤
I see what you did there, "only the grace of God climbing into the pit can get a person out." 😏
@@lonelyguyofficial8335 understanding... finally,.. God's grace saved me!!
How did it take 29 years to figure you had theological difference?
A good thing to remember that may keep some folks from talking past each other on here:
Calvinists and non-Calvinists have completely different definitions of the word "Sovereignty."
To the Calvinist crowd, "Sovereignty" is essentially a synonym for "Divine Determinism."
To non-Calvinists, Sovereignty means Authority and Power over all things.
They are not the same.
That's some really helpful information. Thank you.
Could you define anything in the creation, both seen and unseen, that the LORD God is NOT SOVE-REIGHN over according to you Self Determinists?
@ManassehJones He is Sovereign over everything. Period.
In his Sovereignty, he Sovereignly decreed that as His image-bearers, we would occasionally have the power, from Him, to determine some things for themselves.
"Self-Determinism" (as you refer to it, although we commonly refer to it as "Responsibility")is a gift from God, not a paradox or a contrast with His Authority.
There is nothing that God is not Sovereign over. Nothing. Not one thing, even our God-given, Sovereignly ordained free wills.
@@GhostBearCommander oxymoronic is an understatement
@@GhostBearCommander 🎯🎯The issue revolves around the proper definition of sovereign. Calvinists misuse the term 'sovereign' as a distraction in argument to get a "buy-in" because God's sovereignty is not in question... BUT they actually mean to say that God "meticulously controls" all things at all times. Which is not what the Bible ever indicates. God is not required to control anything simply because he could if he chose to. God is not obligated to exert the full extent of his power over any situation, God is free to do as he pleases, which includes nothing at all. He is not in bondage to his own abilities. Calvinists seem to assume God uses his power as if they might if only they had it. Satan is focused on God's power and is jealous of it... he is not at all concerned about God's Love.
Creating beings with the freedom to choose their own path, to love, honor and obey him or rebel against him is no threat to God's sovereignty. God was equally as sovereign over his creation in the Garden before the fall a he is afterwards.
@@ManassehJones
Mr T
Funny guy.
You are right when you say that Calvinism messes people’s relationship with God and life in general. My walking with God was ok until they started to preach these doctrines of TULIP. I got confused at first (bringing a direct contradiction to what 1 Corinthians 14:33 states), but then it became unbearable when they said that the Lord Jesus did not die for all. That was shocking and I knew something fishy was definitely going on. From there on, I haven’t been able to have a good and sincere relationship with my Calvinistic brothers in Christ. Calvinism had just brought darkness, confusion, and division. It’s like when a reformed preacher starts preaching, I don’t really know if what they say is honest or it’s just a message for the elect, otherwise it doesn’t make any sense to preach against false teachers, or sin and call people to repentance, because if they are not elect, they won’t turn to God… It’s nonsense. The only one thing good about Calvinism is that it made me study the Scriptures in more depth to realize that this is a destructive doctrine.
Easy to prove by Bible and logic that Jesus did not die for all. Are you open minded enough to hear it?
First, you most likely believe in limited atonement. Otherwise, you would believe in universal atonement. And there are some Christians, however mixed up, who believe that everyone is saved. I'll bet you are a limited man on this issue.
But let's put this to the test. Pick your favorite OT lost person. Do you like Goliath? Pharoah? Ahab? Jezebel? Any will do.
According to Jesus in the NT, where are these folks right now and what are they doing? They are in Hell, experiencing forever the wrath of God against them, having died in their sins, and now paying for their sinfulness throughout eternity.
Now back to Jesus. If, say, Ahab is at this very moment experiencing the wrath of God forever and ever for his sins, then how could a just and loving God force His wrath upon His Son on the cross 880 years later to pay for Ahab's sins when Ahab has been doing just that already for 880 years before Calvary? To believe that, we have the situation of Christ being crucified again, something really condemned in Hebrews 6.
Further, we also run afoul of Isaiah 53 wherein we have the depiction of the suffering servant (Jesus) seeing the travail of His soul and being satisfied. Not dissatisfied. Not worrying about Ahab still suffering for Ahab's sins despite what Jesus would attempt to do for him. And we don't have a truly angry Son of God wondering why the Father is making Him die in vain for someone in Hell forever anyway. Do you see the many problems here?
In other words, Isaiah 53 is saying that Jesus is not some kind of masochist who just likes to suffer for sin; instead He suffers for the sins of a particular people, in this case, the elect. And only the elect. A limited (like A/Ps and Calvinists would both agree on) albeit large group of people. Jesus prays about this very thing in John 17 when he declines to pray for the world. And our Dear Lord is satisfied in His great work to save these elect people. The people given to Christ by the Father for salvation. Jesus actually and literally saves them. All of them. Again, John 17.
This one teaching from God's word destroys Arminian/Provisionism in one move since we see here from God's word that Christ did not die for everyone. He died for the elect. Have a problem with that? Talk to the Judge.
That will preach all day. Amen.
Btw, there are at least two additional Bible teaching scenarios that prove A/P wrong, but also actually impossible as in "you can't get there from here" impossible. Stay tuned.
@@macdaddyp8437Yep, this video reminds me of the kind of people who rejected the Man who was the original "Calvinist" (as many would call Him) John 12:37-40. And why.
Also, in this video Jordan Yahoo is reminding me of Ed Wood when he brought out Bela Lugosi to be in his "Plan 9 from Outer Space."
@@Gablesman888the Bible has been logically used to prove many things including slavery, wars of conquest, and subjugation of women. Logic is only as valuable as the premises upon which it is based. Your logic assumes it's own end from the beginning of it's reasoning, and is therefore flawed. Limited atonement does not have to conform to the definition imposed upon it by Calvinist dogma. Conditional atonement is both limited and applicable to all people who chose to believe - thus, "He died once for ALL...". It satisfies all necessary clauses in scripture without adding extra-biblical ideas nor attributing things to God that are contrary to His revealed nature. A loving God does not create people to suffer eternally for his personal glory. He doesn't need to. He is full of all glory with or without our adoration.
Furthermore, you assume that Ahab is in hell suffering eternal torment as imagined by the medieval interpreters of scripture, but that is not contextually accurate. Hades, Sheol, and Gehenna are words used to refer to the abode of the dead, the underworld, the grave - not the hell of burning fire imagined by the reformers and their theological forebears. Take the story of Lazarus and the rich man. On one side we have Lazarus and Abraham in paradise - Eden, or spiritual Israel - while the rich man is in the wilderness, the wasteland. It's referred to a a "fiery place" and we imagine that literally, but there is no fire in the story unless we put it there. Similarly, Egypt is referred to as a furnace, but is it literally a furnace, or is that metaphoric description?
The only place we read about sinners thrown into a fiery pit is the lake of fire in Revelation. I don't think this is a place of eternal torment as much as it is a place of final destruction, seeing how both death and the grave are thrown in also, and neither of them have bodies, nor are they persons who are able to suffer. For that matter, human souls do not have bodies either, and cannot be tormented by fire. For a more thorough take on this subject, Professor Edward Fudge does a great job in his book, "The Fire that Consumes". Now, you may want to take these scriptures literally, but that would also mean, for logical consistency, that you'd have to remove your hands and your eyes if they caused you to sin.
Imparting selfish, human motives to God - like personal glory or wrath that cannot be satisfied without violence - lessens Him for the sake of fitting into a box of our understanding. Calvinists retort, "You just don't understand the wisdom of God", but if the wisdom of God is beyond our ability to comprehend, then why do Calvinists also proclaim to understand it better than others with differing views?
In the Armenian-Wesleyan view, God is sovereign enough to remain so in the face of human free will. He is not shackled to us for either His glory or our cooperation in accomplishing His will. Instead of a God who is so small He must pre-determine & micro manage every single event for His own glory - including child sexual molestation and the eternal suffering of his enemies - we accept a God who is big enough to accomplish His good, perfect, loving will even if we chose not to follow it. Furthermore, God is a free will being who created us in him image and likeness. Thus, we are also free will beings, and that fact did not change with the fall. Hence all the scriptures about choosing life and not hardening our hearts. Determinism renders all these scriptures not only useless, but contradictory. Why encourage people to choose who cannot choose? Is God so childish that He plays these kinds of head games? Is He so petty that He will arbitrarily allow an innocent person to be punished in place of sinners? Or maybe, there's another way of viewing God's wrath just like there is another way of viewing God's foreknowledge, sovereignty, and the limitedness of atonement?
As an example of determinism not being the sole means of explaining God's relationship with His creation, consider the story of David at the city of Keilah in 1 Samuel 23. Saul finds out David is in a city and goes to capture him. David finds out and asks the Lord two questions: Will Saul come to Keilah, and will the people hand him over? The answer to both is, "Yes". So David and his men leave. Saul never goes to Keilah and the people never hand David over. God knows two things that did not happen because David made a choice based on new information. Foreknowledge does not equal for ordained or determined. The gospel works the same way. God presents information, revelation, and allows people to choose, just like He did in Eden, just like He did repeatedly with Israel, just like Jesus and His disciples did in their ministry.
Finally, Calvinism is, at it's roots, irrelevant. If God predetermined who will and won't believe, then He predetermined all of us non-Calvinists to hold to Arminian-Wesleyan theology. If Calvinism is true, there's no point arguing against Arminianism, because God determined it for us. Likewise, if Calvinism is false, you freely choose to believe it, and I'm perfectly fine with you doing so because it's your choice, and it won't disqualify you from saving faith in Christ. So, in the end, it really doesn't matter, and we should probably stop disqualifying other believers and dividing the body over secondary issues.
Sorry for the long post, but I hope it at least helped you understand a different point of view.
@@dw5523 You must learn to write sensibly and without endless wordiness. I did not read this mess. It is too long.
Do it over if you like and say what you were going to say in 100 words or less.
Sell your "treatises" to Doubleday. LOL.
P.S. One of my missives here was way too long too and I ask your forgiveness.
@@Gablesman888 you must learn to write with less hypocrisy and arrogance. I didn't read this mess. Too little effort. Do it over if you like and say what you were going to say with a little humility. Sell your smug condescension to the atheists, LOL.
P.S. next time be lazy all the way and don't bother replaying when you can't be bothered to read.
I love the emotionalism and the tears! Shows a heart soft towards God.
I agree.
The shrews on "The View" show emotionalism and tears. They deceive many also. It's their job. LOL.
thank you brother. i feel your love for all our brothers and sisters. may the Lord bless both of you more in your ministry! - middle east believer
Fantastic podcast. Loved it. Loved hearing the compassion.
When your a protestant who believes in a nascent theology that the historical Church has never believed like calvinism its hard to break out of it when your in these circles. The Body of Christ held a council that dealt with these heresies in the late 1600s. God bless you man.
What's the name of that council?
Do you mean the council of Trent??
Where Rome DENIED the sufficiency of grace and condemned Protestants??
@@wretchedsinnerRighteousSavior council of jerusalem
The council of ritual cursing. Lol
LOL. Many in the early church held to 1 or more of the doctrines of grace. Source: The Cause of God and of Truth by John Gill. It's a free e-book on Monergism.
I can recount a moment where I was wrestling with the implications of Calvinistic teaching. And when it came to a head, I went to the Lord in prayer and asked Him “Lord, did you come to save the whole world, or did you come to save only the elect?”
And I heard Him respond this one sentence. I heard it as clearly as I can hear these two men. As simple an answer as could be given. He said “I came to save sinners.”
And two months later, the Lord showed me this simple passage of Scripture that settled all doubt in my soul.
1 Timothy 1:15: “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.”
He did come to save sinners. But not all as we see are saved. Did Jesus fail? No. He died for the Sheep...all that the Father gives Him.
Blaspheming Calvinism heretic polluted your comment brother. He will soon be in the lake of fire.
Romans 3:26 that God might be just….Calvinism steals God’s justification. If he didn’t die for all and doesn’t freely offers salvation to all how is God justified. Good show Jordan I enjoyed this interview.
Good point.
Calvinists would say you were never truly a Calvinist.
Sounds like a proper cult..
Kkkkkkk true
It seems that most (not all) Calvinists are happier about finding Calvinism than they are about finding Jesus.
Straw man fallacy. Smarten up please.
Great discussion! I can relate quite a bit to these stories. I was a very passionate calvinist for 6 years while i was studying theology in college and was really into people like MacArthur, piper, washer, white, and sproul. I'm no longer calvinist. I still have have a lot of respect for some of those guys, but i agree that calvinism can cause some pretty negative psychological and communal issues.
I was so excited to see this pop up….listening now, may have to finish tomorrow, but LOVING it so far. So thankful for these testimonies brothers!
Everything I believe, I got from Scripture. I don't care what the interpretation is of any other person. That's how you stay on the right path. Let the Spirit course correct you.
1 John 2:27 KJV
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
And how do you know that your interpretation of what the Bible teaches is true and correct? Sure, the Holy Spirit must guide us in all things, but His guidance is not against logic, reason and coherence.
In my opinion it's very simple to test if your interpretation and theology is correct, or not: if your interpretation is coherent, consistent and non-contradictory with all the Bible truths that are established from the text, from Genesis to Revelation.
For example, the Calvinist interpretation of God's sovereignty as unilateral divine determinism, it's incoherent, inconsistent and contradictory with other clear Biblical truths, like God's love, holiness and goodness, God's nature and character, human moral responsibility and libertarian freedom (just to name a few).
"To claim that each person’s eternal destiny is absolutely, unconditionally and eternally predetermined by God alone and also claim that each person, including the non-elect, are held responsible by God for their believing or not believing the gospel message (when it is God that ultimately foreordained if they would believe or not), is logical and moral nonsense, not “mystery.”
There is nothing “apparently” contradictory about the Calvinist’s soteriology. It’s just contradictory in the plainest and fullest sense of the word.
Again, C. S. Lewis is correct, “nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.” "
Therefore, because God (and the Bible) can't be illogical, nonsensical and contradict Himself, the only logical conclusion is that the Calvinist interpretation of God's sovereignty as unilateral divine determinism is incorrect and false.
Unfortunately and sadly, calvinists don't think so, and don't recognize this problem; they keep believing and proposing and teaching their interpretation and theology as true and correct, despite the incoherencies, inconsistencies and contradictions.
That is why they have an hermeneutics of incoherence. Which is ironic, considering how much emphasis and importance they have on exegesis and proper biblical interpretation, isn't it?
MillenniumNow. Amen. Were you a Self Determinist before becoming "Reformed?"
I was so appreciative of the title I gave it a thumbs-up before I even watched this!
😊 thanks for the thumbs up!
Nice. Glad I met you Jordan. This is good stuff. We need to talk more for sure.
I completely agree.
Cerca 134
Here are just a few of the misrepresentations I have heard in this video:
1 Calvinists don't believe God is merciful, gracious and loving to all His creatures. He is not holding out His hands to sinful rebels [elect and non-elect].
2. Calvinists believe in unconditional hardening for no reason.
3. Calvinists don't believe in a free and sincere offer of pardon and justification to all sinners without exception.
4. Calvinists believe in causal determininsm.
5. Calvinists believe God treats His creatures like robots or puppets.
I could go on and on.
❤️❤️❤️ATTENTION JORDAN your friend may be looking for Doug Gustafson, who is a councillor that left Calvinism 2 years ago. The latest video from Beyond the Fundamentals features him talking about the negative effects Calvinism has had on some people.
JORDON, you should really team up with Kevin over at Beyond Freudian Fundamentals. Together you two can do the Flesh-o-gesis methodology of scripturial interpretation. He denies Gods effectual grace too. You should fit right in.
He is that wonderful "loving" guy that wants to grab calvinists by the throat. Just the type of person we should listen too.
@@davevandervelde597 You talking about AI Kevin?
@ManassehJones I dont know but I watched a guy with Kevin and it was laughable except people believe hm.
@@davevandervelde597 Kevin really needs to go into this worlds trade of being a psychologist or psychiatrist teaching Freudian manipulations. Listening to him for 2 minutes proves the truth of total depravity.
Calvinism is trivially easy to understand. Sproul, in _Chosen by God_, ascribes to Augustinian predestination - "in its most elementary form, is that our final destination, heaven or hell, is decided by God not only before we get there, but before we are even born." If one holds that statement as true, they are a Calvinist, even though the explanations and verbal gymnastics that follow can get rather complicated.
The "you don't understand Calvinism" canard is a defense mechanism against Calvinistic propositions stated in an unpalatable, or non-sympathetic, way.
This was quite the emotional journey, for him telling it, and I'm sure for all of us listening.
My all-time favourite.
I appreciate this video and other videos like it pointing out how damaging Calvinism is. However, I would say that the doctrine itself is what 1 Timothy 4:1 warns us about in the end times about doctrines of demons and 2 Cornithians 11:4 and Galations 1:8 saying anyone who preaches a false gospel be under God’s curse. I have seen firsthand how damaging this doctrine is where they convince people that Jesus didn’t even die for the sins of everyone but limited atonement and only died for the elect. I wish more people would just be bold about it and call it the heresy that it is.
Great video and testimony. Keep up the good work!!
I heard him talk about how Calvinist use John 6:44, to teach All who God the father draws He will give to the Son and the Son will lift them up on the last day. They mean to use this to prove that God effectually calls or draws the elect to salvation. They were predestined, predetermined to be saved according to Calvinism using amoung others, this verse.
To my Calvinist brothers I ask with all due respect ... Is the drawing done by the calling of the father and is this to save them or not?
If yes its to save, then Why did Christ have to die? If the decision was already made? That interpretation makes the death of Christ unnecesary.
If its not to save them; then you can't say God the father is only drawing the elect. Because this wouldn't be an effectual drawing of those the Father gives to the Son, by an effectual calling to salvation.
Here's the problem in other words:
If God has predestined people before the foundation of the world, as Calvinist also teach, and then these people need God the Father to call them or draw them, give them life and faith for salvation, to then give them to the son, and that decision - To Do All That, was made before they existed, or even did anything good or bad, then Christ death and resurection was really unnecesary.
I could be wrong, but why would I be wrong? Im open to clarity.
God bless and thank you.
I admire the passion. You got some solid intuition in the right direction there. But I would offer some pushback.
I can say, as a former Calvinist here, that what you are lacking in that critique is the emphasis on retributive justice in Calvinistic framework. God Must punish sin, or else He is not a perfectly just God. That is why Christ had to die in the Calvinist view; to receive the punishment for the elect, on an individual level, to substitute for their individual sins before God. Past present and future sins. All sins for that individual. Which is the reason for a particular atonement that is limited to the elect. It's the flow of TULIP itself that answers your objection here.
You need to start further back. Go after the very definition of justice, and what Mercy and Grace are, in relation to justice. Study different atonement theories in church history. Penal Substitution is Not the only, or even necessarily the primary theory of atonement. Some would argue that is isn't even a proper understanding of God's character.
Some food for thought.
@@joshuadavidson7985 Thank you for the insight. I have been studying scriptures for several years, including some formal systematic theology studies, several years ago. But I won't pretend to be a theologian, Im far from it. I have lots to learn!! But under channels like this, and others, including RC, Piper, I have come to understand a lot of the Calvinist position.
I really appreciate your push back. I get your point and will give mine further though and weight on those points left out. There's so much to say, but to be practical we must limit our thoughts in these comment spaces.
In regards to justice. I agree perhaps a framing of justice, mercy, grace is merited. Specially in regards to how they play into election... I mean, before the foundation of the world God the father, has abondond, ignored and left the non elect to their vices before they did anything good or bad, so I would also ask, How is that justice if they had not sinned? Adams fall was not a thing when the decision was made. How is the choosing of the elect, and the condemnation of the others service justice if God the Father made the decision, before anyone did anything good or bad (Rom 9)? This was the underlining position in my original comment. I may need to work on framing it better. But im sure you get the point.
Be blessed Josh, thank you again. Keep up the good work in sharpening us up to defend the faith and give reason to why we believe.
@@chrscr3sp0 yes. It is Much more direct to implicate God with being unjust for that manner of election than it is to ask why Jesus had to die. I think that is the right track. Once you confront the notion of Federal Headship of Adam and an inherited guilt in Adam, you see the fragmentation of the thought beginning to happen. Go back to Genesis 3. Find a place where the text says Adam or Eve were cursed. You can see the Serpent getting cursed for sure. You can see God curse the ground for our sakes, but where was the text that says or even implies that Adam was cursed with a reprobate progeny who will only be able to reject God from now on, BY DESIGN. this is not an arbitrary side effect. It is a curse from God. A judgement. Therefore our Depravity and inability were HIS call. HIS design. And for what?
My co-host (Tyler Fowler) and I have had YEARS of this discussion, as I came out of Calvinism 6ish years ago, and he came out of it at the end/the beginning of this year. It's a time investment, and a real labor of love to contend with someone on these topics and really change their mind. Keep your head up! It is all worth it later!
Every Christian was created in Christ, chosen before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4, 2:10) called as “a chosen race, a royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9, cf. Hebrews 5:4), and was also in Christ as our federal head and representative when He died and rose again (Romans 6:1-14; Colossians 2:12; 3:1-2).
According to 1 Corinthians 1:9, those whom the Father has given to the Son (John 6:37) are brought into union with Christ when they are effectually called (cf. John 6:44) and embrace Christ by faith; faith being the fruit and justification of salvation (Galatians 5:22-23, Romans 3:28, 5:1, John 20:31). Our faith in Him is the effect and definite result of the work of God (John 6:29, Hebrews 12:2, Philippians 1:6); it is “not of ourselves” (Ephesians 2:8-9), because it could never be (Romans 8:7); the wicked do not even have the right to covenant with God (Psalm 50:16), therefore faith is something that we receive from God (2 Peter 1:1); only then does 1 Corinthians 1:30 become true of us: “and because of him you are in Christ Jesus.”
Essentially, faith is a product of man’s fellowship with God, and it is the means of mediation initiated by God through which the Mediator works to save those whom He has both chosen and called, bringing about our sanctification (Acts 26:18).
Think of our union with Christ as a coin with two sides. From the divine side, our union with Christ is secured by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit who is the bond of that eternal union (1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 1:13-14). From the human side, the bond of our union with Christ is the Spirit-granted faith (Philippians 1:29, Acts 13:48) that embraces Him as He is presented to us in the gospel (cf. Acts 5:14; Romans 16:7b, Philippians 3:9).
The power (the Spirit) to believe comes from God; but the act (faith) is our act, though it is guaranteed for and given by the Lord to His elect (after all, we possess the gifts that He has given us, this includes faith). Until we believe, we are outside of Christ, and we must believe to enjoy the full benefits of salvation that He has purchased for His elect.
@@lawrencestanley8989 did you listen to the episode you are commenting on?
I am right there with you, leaving the church my grandpa built that I have a lot of history with, that's being pastored by a childhood friend who's a Calvinist, and not a moderate Calvinist, he's a high or hyper Calvinist.
Further proof that the truth WILL set one free IF one reads it... Eh?
35:00 AMEN... "1 John 2:1-2 reveals: “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father - Jesus Christ, the Righteous One"... In Calvinism, for whom is Jesus Christ 'advocating'? The 'elect', (as defined by Calvinism), need no advocate. Surely God does not need to be reminded of those whom he has already, unchangeably predestined to spend eternity with him! And, the unfortunate reprobate who is destined to eternal damnation is denied any advocacy.🤔🤔 So... for whom does Jesus advocate, and why?
And, how can a Calvinist be consistent with his doctrine and lay claim to Heb 4:16? "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.", Never knowing for certain he is actually 'elect' and entitled to mercy, he is denied within the parameters of TULP of having any confidence of the right to even approach God for mercy... let alone to "come BOLDLY to the throne of grace"... he doesn't even know if he is supposed to be there at all.
The purpose of Calvinism, by design, is to rob the believer of any confidence they are truly loved by God and undermine the relationship with our Heavenly Father which Jesus gave his life to make possible.
Augustine and John Calvin did not 'design' it. They believed the lie sent from the one who did.
LOL. We do need an advocate as Hebrews tells us Jesus is the High Priest of believers. Straw man fallacy much? The Christian life of the elect occurs in time and space. Geez...You have an issue with the writer of Hebrews who teaches that Christ's work as high priest is definite and co-extensive do ya eh? hehheeeee You are denying the word of God here. Those for whom Christ sacrificed for are the ones he is an advocate/intercessor for! If he died for each and every, why doesn't he in John 17 pray for each and every? Scripture over your baseless assertions.
@@SugoiEnglish1 No Straw Man. Calvinism is in perpetual conflict with the very passage you reference. Yes, Jesus is a believer's High Priest. BUT, if Calvinism is true, the numbers of those who are "elected to be saved" from before the foundation of the world are set in eternity past and can neither be added to or diminished. Created, or chosen, as vessels of 'honor', they are NEVER in peril of damnation. Their salvation is by God's decree alone, and this has absolutely nothing to do with anything they will ever do.
As defined by Calvinism, the "elect" quite literally need no " Advocate".
Why does scripture say we need an advocate?.... Because Calvinism is not true.
Have you been guaranteed Calvinism's necessary "Gift of Perseverance?... NO.
In Calvinism, can you be saved without it? ...NO.
Do you 'get it' because an 'advocate' defends you? ...NO.
Could you 'lose it' without having an advocate? .... NO.
Is it ever possible to know if you certainly "have it" before you die? ...NO
If you are NOT 'truly elect', do any promises in the Bible apply to you? ...NO.
A 'thinking' Calvinist cannot even read the 23rd Psalm with confidence and find comfort. Because if they're not "truly" elect it can mean nothing to them except wishful thinking.
A primary tenant of Calvinism is that "regeneration' always precedes faith".
Calvinism contends that men only believe because they are saved.
They are NOT saved "because they believe".
That claim is unsupported anywhere in scripture. It is unbiblical.
I can connect you with Jason Breda:) he’s a dear friend.
That's funny. I was actually going to message you today to get Jason's contact info. I listened to your live video with him last night and really enjoyed it!
@@GreatLightStudiosI’ll message you:)
Cerca 52:00 We don't care what you believe. Feel free to shout it from the house top. You have as much right to be wrong as we have to be right. All we ask is that you begin to accurately represent what we believe in the same way we accurately represent what you believe.
I just an email today (in Chinese) addressing me as a pastor (how do they know me?) and inviting me to view some great conference on youtube...I had no idea who it was from or who the group was, I suspected it was the Chinese cult "Church of Almighty god", but I clicked on the YT link and it was in Korea, so I figured out pretty quickly it was the 新天地 (new heaven and earth) cult. Anyway, I heard you mention in the video you do a lot of work dealing with the S. Korean cults. Just wanted to say, they are in Jakarta, Indonesia alive and well and recruiting from the Chinese speaking pastors here! Crazy stuff! blessings.
1:46:36 I don't think you're out of line for refusing spiritual mentorship from someone who holds to a belief system different than yours. As a Provisionist, I wouldn't want a Calvinist as a mentor, just as I wouldn't want a Calvinist as a pastor.
Calvinism does not have a gospel and most of Evangelical arminianism does not have a God was in Christ conciliating until you understand Union with Christ
Thank you for this video. I’m learning so much on how I can share the flaws my Calvanistic friends believe in.
I completely agree that the theology and soteriology of Calvinism is a complete lie that steals the peace that people can have that Christ died for them and loves them.
I have been a Christian for over 20 years and Calvinism was a dark cloud over me all those years. I was never a Calvinist but hearing of the doctrine as an early Christian made me seriously doubt my faith. It wasn’t until I finally faced these issues head on, by the grace, mercy and direction from the Holy Spirit, and came to know it was false, that I could finally have a deep and meaningful life changing relationship with our Lord a Jesus Christ.
Thank you all for ministry and testimony. ❤️
The gospel is not 'come and serve me' it's believe that Christ died for your sins, was buried, and rose again (for your justification). BELIEVE that and you're saved. Please don't complicate or muddle the gospel with works.
Thank you for this interview ❤
Why do those who leave following one "mans teaching" (calvin) and jump to some other man's teaching (Armenian or other). Every one of these men is faulty. Why not just follow Christ, His word as the Holy Spirit teaches you. All these men attempt to explain spiritual matters in a natural way.(in the flesh) stop with the labels.... didnt Paul take care of this when he reprimanded those following men? (Some follow Cephas, others Appolos....) seriously... so annoying.
JP thank you for your testimony!
1 Corinthians 1:12-13, 3:1-15, 3:18-4:2
Calvinism has been around since Genesis 3. "Did God really say?" It was renamed by people who were impressed by John Calvin's deception but it was defined in the 1st century by a letter from Luke in which he recounts the heartbreaking story of the apostle Paul telling his Ephesian brothers and sisters that they would not seemhim again BUT, to be on the look out for ravenous wolves who are going to infiltrate their flock will want to 'kill' their faith through deception. Calvinism and reformed theology is evil and demonic and that is why these heretics go after 'young sheep' who have just converted and lure them by their lies. Calvinists don't share the Gospel with the world, they decieve weak Christians. May God have mercy on their souls when they stand before the Lord and Judge and He asks them, "Did you share with everyone you meet that I died for them?"(John 3:16-17) "Well, jesus, humm, let's see, we thought we were 'special'!
I can't believe this guy thinks he ever understood Calvinism. It sounds as if he was involved with hyper-Calvinists. No Calvinist would ever deny that sinners are responsible for our sins or affirm that we are deterministically determined [caused] to sin.
Any Calvinists would have known that Romans 5 is not talking about all sinners but about all believers. All sinners do not have the Holy Spirit poured out into their hearts as evidence of God's redeeming and justifying love. All believers do.
I went from non-denominational to Calvinist. I saw verses and passages differently than i did. I reached a point where i couldnt ignore the passages about predestination. Also, learning about Divine Simplicity, Immutability, Omniscience, etc. helped me to solidify my belief that Calvinism is correct. Starting with God first puts a different perspective on things.
What do you mean about puting God first? How are other Christians not puting God first?
Just curious. God bless and Thank you.
Robert...what were you before Gods effectual grace called you out of the Self Determinist false gospel? Baptist?
I would be curious on what versus on predestination convinced you of total depravity (as a Calvinist defines it)
@@mattyb496 How about the verses that declare if you're not born again from above by Gods grace and given a entirely new nature in the image of Christ....you remain 100% in your first birth nature and going to hell? Does that clear it up?
@@chrscr3sp0 What i meant by putting God first is starting with God and then reasoning down to man as opposed to starting with man and reasoning to God.
I start with what I know about God (omniscient, sovereign, immutable, etc.). A lot of times i see people start with their feeling or that they couldn't believe something because something happened in their life. From my viewpoint, I dont see how one gets around theological determinism. I think one has to start to deny (maybe not knowingly) fundamental things about God if one denies theological determinism. I'm not saying that makes one condemned, I simply think they are wrong. My wife is not a Calvinist nor is my pastor, so I have nothing against other Christians.
Grace and peace to you
Its a major pyschological trip for sure. I got to the point of having to think other people dont really exist or that im being tested in a world of matrix or ultimately im at the state of thinking the only alternative is universal reconciliation. But the horrific mind trip to think i must believe in a God who might even be predestining infants to hell etc and to the point of thinking i may not be able to be a Christian anymore if thats who God truly is. His character is being defamed by the end results of calvinism taken to the logical conclusions.
God holds Pastors and teachers more responsible for teaching false doctrine than He does new believer for believing false doctrine.
I do not feel sorry for believers such as Justin Peters who has hardened his heart to the gospel. I am kind to him, but his behavior is disgusting. Armenians believe that you can lose your salvation. I call what is being talked about here traditional Christianity.
Jordan, Why don't you have someone on who understands what we believe? If you imagine cerca 18:00 that Calvinists believe God does anything to push sinners away or to keep them from believing, you never understood Calvinism. It might help you to read a few Calvinist's commentaries on Romans 10:21. I can provide some of those quotes if you like
Early in the interview when this second part of the verse was mentioned:
Romans 8:34b (HCSB)
…He [Jesus] also is at the right hand of God
and intercedes for us.
It made me wonder why a Calvinist would ever cite this verse, or even these references:
1 John 2:1b (HCSB)
…But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father - Jesus Christ the Righteous One.
Hebrews 7:25b (HCSB)
…He always lives to intercede for them [believers].
Why do I say this?
Because, if someone is “chosen” according to how Calvinism defines being chosen, it does not make sense to me as to why Jesus would ever need to intercede on the behalf of someone who was predetermined to be in Christ before the foundation of the world. In other words, the elect need an advocate in heaven to defend them before God, even though God elected them? 🤨
Cerca 1:20 Perhaps it would help you to notice that Jesus did not say "you [hardened sinners] cannot come to me apart from the Father's drawing." He said, "NO ONE can come to me unless the Father draws him and I will raise him up again at the last day." Everyone drawn will be raised on the last day. The text does not say everyone who responds properly to the drawing will be raised to life on the last day.
When I was Calvinist I believed in Jesus
I still believe in Jesus
It’s not a big deal
If a person is living in sin, should they not question the reality of their repentance and faith in Christ? Do you believe false faith does not exist?
It doesn't matter who the objector is in Romans 9. Only Flowers and his ilk can imagine that it does. The text still states that God has the sovereign right to show mercy to whom He wills and harden whom he wills and affirms that no one resists His will [of decree in this case].
What I am hearing is that this guy was influenced by RUclips videos and debates and not by a careful exegesis of pertinent passages.
Jordan, If you honestly have any desire to know what Calvinists actually believe, why don't you have me on your channel for a discussion of these issues?
Enjoyed. Personal opinion. Armenius Calvin is a false dichotomy
100% agree
Over two hours and not a single attempt to exegete even one biblical passage relative to the issues involved. Impressive.
Leaving? John 1 2:19.
At 1:27:11, he quotes from John 12:32 where he seems to think that God draws absolutely everyone without exception. This notion is demonstrably false.
In John 12:20, we see that Greeks have just been brought to Jesus to hear Him teach, and now that He is in the presence of both Jews AND Gentiles, in verse 32, He declares “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all to Myself;” he doesn’t say “all men,” (“all men” is a poor English translation) as if to indicate absolutely everyone without exception, but rather, in the Greek, He simply says “all.” We also see that Jesus did not meet with the Greeks at this time because He said that His drawing will occur after He is lifted up, after all, Jesus declared that “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). When Jesus said that He would draw “all” to Himself, we know that Jesus could not possibly have been teaching that His cross will draw absolutely everyone without exception because “the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing” (1 Corinthians 1:18, 23), so we see that there are some for whom the cross does not draw, but repel.
Rather, this “all” refers to “all different categories,” that is, both Jews AND Gentiles (cf. Acts 13:48, 15:13-18), since it was to both Jews AND Gentiles that Jesus was now speaking, and we see this in the indefinite pronouns that He used: “all” (vs 32), “everyone” (vs 46), and “anyone” (vs 47); this concept is revisited all over the New Testament (cf. Revelation 5:9).
The concept that Christ taught that salvation was for both Jews and Gentiles took Peter a while to grasp, and indeed, God had to give him a vision in order that he would grasp the concept in Acts 10:9-16 and 34-35. Here, he learns that “God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.” Pay special attention to the phrase, “every nation.” God is not the God of the Jews only, but of Gentiles also (Romans 3:29, Isaiah 49:6).
So how can we be certain that the “all” here doesn’t refer to absolutely everyone without exception? If John 12:32 was intended to teach that Jesus draws to Himself “absolutely everyone without exception,” then that would be blatant universalism since we read in John 6:44 that Jesus will raise up ALL who are drawn to Him; that would mean that hell is empty, and that no one escapes being drawn into salvation with Him, and that position denies all that Jesus taught about hell.
@lawrencestanley8989 lol umm not it wouldn’t be blatant universalism.
Drawing doesn’t equal salvation.
Try again.
@@apilkey
Straw man. No one ever said that drawing equals salvation. But, since Jesus raises up all who are drawn, drawing DOES lead to salvation. Go read John 6.
@@lawrencestanley8989 YOU said drawing equals Salvation.
Go read your comment again.
@@apilkey
I re-read my original comment three times, nowhere did I say that drawing equals salvation. Either you misread my comment, or you are a liar.
@@lawrencestanley8989 You said, “So how can we be certain that the “all” here doesn’t refer to absolutely everyone without exception? If John 12:32 was intended to teach that Jesus draws to Himself absolutely everyone without exception then that would be blatant universalism since we read in John 6:44 that Jesus will raise up ALL who are drawn to Him.”
You’re equating John 6:44 with God raising up all who are drawn so you’re equating drawing with universalism.
You’re wrong either way.
God raises up those who come to Christ and believe and are born again.
That’s not universalism sorry keep trying but you’re wrong (again).
Just because this guy drew faulty conclusions from soteriological monergism does not argue against Calvinism.
So painful to listen to how he understands determinism, assurance, sanctification and missions, God’s love. It may surprise him to learn many Calvinists do hold to a universal love of God even for the non-elect. Personally I don’t, but most would subscribe to a common grace given to everyone without exception. A legitimate issue with Calvinism is that many do caricature it due to misunderstanding and run off on a tangent. This isn’t unique to Calvinism as I can give you just as many anecdotes for other theologies that people have misused due to their fallen natures and abused. Sad.
I'm sorry, but this is a typical you-don't-understand-Calvinism response. Maybe these men DO understand Calvinism and reject it.
We cannot try to create God in what we perceive as " fair"
His ways ARE NOT our ways. His thoughts ARE NOT our thoughts. Don't try to push HIM into your concepts of fair . .
HE receives ALL the GLORY and HE doesn't care if you think HIS thoughts and ways are unfair. Who are we to reply against Him????
James White is correct that Jesus was pronouncing judgment on official Jerusalem. The verse should never be made to mean that sinners are able to frustrate God's purpose. The issue of God's desire for sinners to repent is another issue altogether.
1:23:29 Calvinists don't believe in unconditional hardening for no reason. If this guy had been a Calvinists he would know that.
At 1:19:31, are you suggesting that Pharaoh was hardened because of his response to the Father? The scriptures tell us that He didn't even know about Yahweh (Exodus 5:2), so how could he respond to him one way or the other?
@@BiblicalTeachings
Wow, define non-sequitur. So you don't even want to try to address the point I see. Instead, you only want to pursue your crusade.
Calvinists who understand the doctrine don't worry about our election. Whether God has chosen us our not is His business and not ours. Our concern is whether we have truly believed. That should not be a concern only for Calvinists but for everyone who has professed faith in Christ
Maybe the comments you don't like are about your dishonesty.
Cerca 50:00
Perhaps you can enlighten us concerning verses you think we have not considered in their biblical, theological, historical and cultural contexts. There are not Calvinistic verses and synergists' verses. We seek to understand every verse in the light of every other biblical verse.
At 14:11, we see demonstrated here his misunderstanding of "Irresistible Grace" which is but a caricature, which he rightly rejects. His misunderstanding casts doubt on his assertion that he was a Calvinist for 20 years. If he was, then he didn't understand it then, and he doesn't understand it now.
The saving grace of God is effectually applied only to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and, in God's timing, He overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith.
Note that the doctrine does NOT hold that absolutely every influence of God's Holy Spirit cannot be resisted (cf. Acts 7:51, 2 Chronicles 36:15-16, Isaiah 50:2, 65:12, 66:4, Proverbs 1:24, Jeremiah 7:13, Hosea 11:3-5), but rather that those whom God has chosen to save cannot resist the Holy Spirit effectively, that the Holy Spirit is able to overcome all resistance and make his influence irresistible and effective. Thus, when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved. (John 6:37,39,44-45,65)
This answers his request at 1:26:22 where he wants to be shown that "they can resist until they can't resist."
I am at 42:00 and still no bibilical exegesis. This guy is reacting to wrong reactions to biblical doctrine, not to Calvinism.
Such confusion.
At 1:20:37, in Matthew 13, Jesus taught the parable of the sower in which only the seed that was sown on good soil yielded a crop - and how does one have good soil? It must be prepared beforehand.
Ephesians 2:10 - For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
The saints are the workmanship of Jesus, that is, we are wholly the result of God who has created us for the purpose of redemption (“in Christ Jesus”) and for sanctification, "for good works," and “so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us.” (Cf. 2 Corinthians 5:21, Ephesians 1:4, Philippians 1:6, 2:13, Colossians 1:16)
According to Ezekiel 36:22, God acts for His own sake to give His people a new heart and a new spirit (verse 26), which causes them to walk in His ways and do His judgments (verse 27). The cause and effect order here is very important.
I love both these guys. I havent finished watching yet but just to make a comment as I hear this at the 30 minute mark.
I have 57 years of reformed upbringing and studied this extensively. I think I have a real clear view of this.
There are differents degrees of calvistic doctrine. It sounds like JP. is describing a hype view which I am very aware is out there.
I have never ever been taught to ask myself to question if I am elect. That is not taught by anyone (Sproul,MacArthur,Piper, or any couple dozen more I could name) and is not applicable. It is also not asked of anyone else. This is one huge reason this is getting the misrepresentation it does get.
Jordan I think once again saying the "implications of calvinism " is just not honest.
One other point is that it always sounds like non reformed believers have no times they question their faith. This is not what you are saying but it is how it sounds.
I know its not easy to make these but it has to be balanced. 😊
I think the difference isn’t that Christians who are “non-reformed” don’t have times of doubt and questioning of their faith, it more has to do with whether or where assurance is found in each view. It appears Calvinism itself can cause more doubt and isn’t able to provide complete or lasting assurance because of the doctrine itself.
@@PrudenceMcFrugal There can only be assurance in salvation in the Reformed doctrines of grace theology. No Self Determinist can ever trust wholeheartedly in their salvation because it centers on their Self.
@PrudenceMcFrugal That is how this should be framed and discussed. Thank you. How does the Bible teach us to have assurance in what Christ has done for us. This video makes it sound 1-sided.
@@davevandervelde597 The problem the Calvinist has is their claim that God only 'truly' loves the "elect" as they define election. However, nobody knows for sure who these lucky folk are.... and they cannot know for certain if they will receive the 'gift of Perseverance' Augustine said is necessary and only given to the truly 'elect'. Since they teach their own belief is only by God's decree, likewise, it's also God who decreed the the actions of those who eventually abandon their profession of faith and deny Christ.
If their doctrine is true.... and God does it to some people... (Calvin called it "evanescent/temporary/false faith), they can never know for certain if he's doing it to them in their sleep tonight. They actually end up worshiping a God who cannot be trusted to love any one specific individual. Dr. Sproul asked people to pray he would "die in the "faith"... but, ironically, what good would the prayer do if he was never really 'picked' in the first place.🤔 Dr. Sproul admitted there is no assurance of one's own salvation afforded in Calvinism.
@@PrudenceMcFrugal Yes, doubts of one's salvation... and, "how do I know I am truly 'elect'?" is probably the most common question at Q&A sessions in Calvinist/Reformed seminars. They 'dance' around it all the time, but really have no answer, only commiseration. They always encourage people to examine their lives, and their Christian 'activities'... i.e., "Works", in search of some sense of evidence they are saved... but can never know if it's 'enough'... Ultimately, they cling to their works a planks from a sinking ship. Having already explained away all the passages about believing in Christ to one's own salvation, it's all they have.
You seem to be arguing that Calvinism cannot be true because some weird people have misunderstood the doctrine and reacted wrongly. Where is the biblical exegesis?
Perhaps when you talk about hardening as the reason people reject the gospel, you might wish to ask yourself how these people were reacting to God's self-disclosure prior to their hardening. They were not hardened for no reason.
The whole thing about sin was just really weird. The guy clearly had zero grounding in the Doctrine of God, which I conclude from him seeming to think of God as some big man in the sky even when he was talking about his time as a Calvinist.
This guy doesn't even seem to have a clue what Calvinists believe. If he thinks that Calvinists deny that sinners resist the overtures of God's mercy, he never understood Calvinism at all. I am 15 minutes into this video and have not heard a shred of bibilical exegesis yet.
I’ve only been comforted by knowing that God has everything under control, that nothing catches him by surprise, and that all things actually do work for the good of those who love God.
IMO, the only way Calvinism can destroy lives is from really bad teaching and really bad understanding, which the latter I am hearing in this discussion. I have to agree with the other commenter that said it seems what’s being portrayed here is a hyper Calvinism, a very harsh hyper view at that.
What is hypercalvinism other than taking it to its logical conclusion?
@jordandthornburg A hyper calvinist view is closer to the athiest view of determinism. Causing all things, therefore, mans ability to choose is zero ,or fatalism. This is were Jordan and others are not able to get over that stumbling block and continue to make people believe that is what calvinism is. It is not. Theistic determinism is were God has given his creation and specifically man the ability to choose and be fully culpable for those choices. But all that happens not appart from Gods plan but together with Gods plan. God is not just outside of creation responding to it but simultaneously in His creation bringing about His sovereign decree.
If this was not true God could never make a promise and we could not believe He could keep it.
_"l've only been comforted by knowing that God has everything under control"_
All Christians believe this. But I do agree that Calvinists feel comfort in knowing that God is the one who willed, decreed, and meticulously controlling every sin and evil they commit.
_"IMO, the only way Calvinism can destroy lives is from really bad teaching and really bad understanding,"_
False! Calvinism destroys lives because that's what God willed, decreed, and brought to pass.
_"what's being portrayed here is a hyper Calvinism"_
Nope. It's consistent Calvinism.
Perhaps you need to consider the question Paul asked seriously. Who are you to reply against God? It is not our task to make God look good to atheists.
Z
As
You are told that you don't understand Calvinism because you don't. That is painfully obvious to anyone who understands Calvinism.
At 1:32:40, mysteriously holding men accountable?
While God is properly said to ordain, and thus be the ultimate cause of all things (Ephesians 1:11, Romans 11:36, James 4:13-15) -even evil- (cf. Revelation 17:17, 2 Samuel 12:11-12, 1 Kings 22:19-23 / 2 Chronicles 18:18-22) He is never the proximate, or efficient cause of evil, and scripture regards only the proximate or efficient cause of evil as the chargeable or blameworthy party.
In the following passages, we see God actively determining, decreeing, setting, predestining, or sending men to perform an action, and for those men who are doing what God has set them to do, it is a sin, an evil act, and they could not have done otherwise; God is in control of the men performing the action, and yet He is innocent of sin, and those performing the sinful actions are morally accountable for sin: Genesis 50:20, Job 1:13-15, 17, 21, Isaiah 10:5-6, Judges 9:22-23, 1 Samuel 2:25, 16:14, 18:10, 19:9, 2 Samuel 12:11-12, Psalm 105:24-25, Proverbs 16:4, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12, 1 Peter 2:8-10, Romans 9:22, Acts 2:22-23, 4:27-28.
Cerca 127:30Certainly you know everyone who calls on then name of the Lord are not the same as all or everyone, don't you?
You ARE obsessed with calvin. Just know if you ARE saved --- God chose you.
You did not choose HIM on your own corrupt " free will"
Only evil continually God says
I would certainly identify with Calvin and most of his theology but I listen to you in order to understand your position. I am not in any way fearful that i may hear something that may debunk what i believe to be true. And if what you are saying aligns with scripture then so be it! It seems that the "non-calvinist" are viewing scripture through a lens that skews what it actually says. For instance John 3:16 Says "whosoever believes", it does not say whosoever will believe in any translation I can find... when your experience, which should always be suspect, aligns with what scripture says it causes one to take notice... I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I have nothing to do with my conversion, it was simply a response to what the Lord had done in my life. Blessings to you all
It's in the KJV
Zz....Were you formerly a Provisionists, Baptist, or some other branch of Self Determinism before realizing your election and calling?
Scripture and my experience align as well. The issue is: are you interpreting both properly? Also Romans 10:13 says whosoever. I don’t think it’s much of a point, respectfully.
@@jordandthornburg Read down 3 verses. "Believing" is not an action or workings of the free will of man.
Romans 10:16
But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
@@ManassehJones I think i see why you conclude Calvinism. I cannot see for the life of me how you concluded that from that verse in all honesty.
Most highest desire????
Cerca132:30 You really need to stop misquoting that passage from Calvin and read the rest of the treatise. I have provided several quotes from Calvin that show that he did not affirm what you are claiming. You seem willing to lie rather than accurately represent what Calvin actually wrote. Shame on you.
It's not that you don't understand Calvinism, it's that you don't understand who God is. He is infinite and the finite cannot comprehend the infinite. All anecdotal arguments mean nothing.
Sadly, Calvinism is in direct contradiction to hundreds of simple-to-understand verses that God chose to reveal about Himself.
Sadly, By definition, you don’t believe God’s Word that He gave us so we would know Him. If you reject God’s definitions of Himself, sadly, you may find yourself worshiping a different god and proclaiming a different gospel.
Specific simple verses you don’t believe (by definition)
1 Timothy 2:3b-4A(ESV) …God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved…
If you set aside your Calvinist dictionary (anti-biblical definition of sovereignty) and read the words on the page, this passage absolutely contradicts Calvinism.
Another passage:
Jeremiah 19:4b-5 (ESV) because they have filled this place with the blood of innocents, and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind.
God explicitly states that He did not decree these abominations NOR DID THEY COME TO MY MIND.
The word ‘Sovereignty’ is not even in the Bible. A Biblical definition of God’s control MUST not contradict these verses.
Jesus held the Pharisees accountable for their cognitive dissonance (which Jesus called hypocrisy). God created logic, which declares that cognitive dissonance (believing contradictory things simultaneously) is simply a lie.
So when God shows up as a man and dwells among us and gets crucified, you're unable to comprehend that?
God is personable and relatable. You're right the infinite is impossible to understand but he provides a way.
Please!!!!! No true Calvinist puts their faith in election 30:29. What a stupid thing to say.
God will NOT share HIS glory with another. HE MUST choose to save some. We were reprobate --- ONLY evil continually. Just accept the pure word--- quit OBSESSING with calvin. It's evil to give glory to calvin
And don’t get me wrong, nobody has to be a Calvinist in order to be a Christian, but all of these horrible takes and asserting perceived entailments are just bad. Have me on Jordan, ask me questions about Calvinism, perhaps I can help get a better idea of what it entails. Reject it for what it is and not some caricature built in your own mind.
I've been watching a good number of these videos lately, and I must respectfully say that (despite how cliche or predictable this may sound) I find myself often wondering what kind of reformed theology have these guys grown up with? Secondly, these folks act like they discovered something new that has never been seen before or has never been thoroughly dealt with time and again, over the centuries. Third, the conclusions they run to with some of these passages are positions that even most Arminians wouldn't even hold to and don't. Fourth, I notice a pattern of drawing human analogies and trying to apply them to God. That is foolish and (whether intentional or not) pushes God down to man's level and forces Him to abide by the same rules and limitations that we are bound to. And finally, I notice a consistent theme of a need to not feel bad about God's sovereignty and make salvation palatable to us. The lengths to which some of these videos go to eliminate God's sovereign choice and exalt man's free will is rather disturbing to me. It reminds me of what Jehovah's Witnesses do to eliminate a Trinitarian framework from their view of Scripture. They'll quote a battery of verses that "clearly" show how Jesus can't be God and then accuse the Trinitarian of twisting those clear verses to fit their Trinitarian tradition. That is a foolish way to approach Scripture. It takes an understanding of the WHOLE of revelation to begin to see how it all holds together harmoniously. This is not to be confused with the belief that it will all fall into place, according to our human understanding and eliminate all questions. There will always be an element of the unknowable when it comes to the character of God and how He is bringing about His perfect plan of redemption. But there will never be inconsistency in the testimony of Scripture. The kind of theological conundrums we're left with in a provisionist/synergistic theological framework are rather significant, IMO and need to be dealt with. I don't see any of these video doing that. Once we eliminate God the capricious ogre, we seem to think that this fixes everything and that is far from the truth. I'm REALLY giving serious thought to releasing a video or two that, in sort of a quick and concise way, get right to the heart of the most common misunderstandings, misrepresentations, and misapplications that I see popping up again and again in these videos. The only thing that makes me hesitant is the fact that explanations and refutations of what I see in these videos already exist in abundance by men far more learned than myself, so what difference would it make if I added mine?
I think it is good to continue to offer the explanation you did. What we see all the time is a misrepresentation and then a conclusion that often is not accurate.
You are right on the money, a faulty character of God seems to be how non reformed views are trying to understand a reformed position.
I see all the same few people responding regularly ( of course, I am one) but it is good to help those whi are reading and not commenting
And the worst part about Calvinism is that you actually believe that God is the one behind everything you're complaining about. He's the one who decreed and is meticulously controlling everything these guys say, think, and believe, and there's nothing these guys can do about what God decreed for them to believe and think.
@@gk.4102 Nonensical, untrue, baseless snark doesn't get us any further, but hey, if it gets you off, clearly that's what matters to you. Your snide rhetoric demonstrates a dangerous combination of arrogance and ignorance. Whatever you may think of me, I'm sincerely trying to bring to light gross category errors that distort truth, while you congratulate yourself for being clever. Take it some place else, would you please?
You have to provide a proper interpretation of scripture before you can actually answer this Nemesis called Calvinism
Disagree with you brothers, God bless and will see on the other side.
That's questionable. Both the titles and destination.
@@ManassehJones haha, I thought about this while writing that reply
The cult of calvinism...only saved if you think like we do...
@AnniEast Its only a cult to the unregenerates
At 39:51 we see yet another misunderstanding of Calvinism.
When Calvin spoke of what is often called double-predestination, he didn't mean what you think he meant.
The term "double predestination" itself is often used in a misleading and ambiguous fashion. Some use it to mean nothing more than the view that the eternal destiny of both elect and reprobate is settled by the eternal decree of God. In that sense of the term, all genuine Calvinists hold to "double predestination"-the fact that the destiny of the reprobate is eternally decreed is clearly a biblical doctrine (1 Peter 2:8; Romans 9:22; Jude 4). But more often, the expression "double predestination" is employed as a pejorative term to describe the view of those who suggest that God is just as active in keeping the reprobate out of heaven as He is in getting the elect in. (There's an even more sinister form of "double predestination," which suggests that God is as active in making the reprobate evil as He is in making the elect holy.)
This view (that God is as active in reprobating the non-elect as He is in redeeming the elect) is more properly labeled "equal ultimacy" (cf. R.C. Sproul, Chosen by God, 142). It is actually a form of hyper-Calvinism and has nothing to do with true, historic Calvinism.
God is not “predestinating” anyone to hell as if He is actively working within the lives of the reprobate to ensure their damnation (this idea is known as equal ultimacy), and thereby making them evil in the process.
Instead, what He is doing by granting eternal life to a chosen few, and actively working within their lives to ensure their salvation, is to allow the remainder to perish, here, He takes His hands off (Isaiah 63:17, 64:7), and leaves the rest of mankind to the unintended consequences brought about by their willful rebellion against God, and God will justly condemn them to hell for their sins.
This is what happens when anabaptistic, "Calvnism", seeker-sensitive, and moral therapeutic deistic theology collide.
Lol....truth!
Lol
I listened for the first 23 mins, sorry I had to pause. All the actor said is I think, maybe, my perception of etc. There is nothing to learn except his feelings and personal perception why he left calvinism. True there are 2 kinds of calvinists or reformed in my opinion - Confused and Enlightened. Those who leave are confused! There is no serious exegesis why he thinks calvinism/Reformed theology is wrong. He mentioned the grace of God is resistible because the Pharisees resisted it. Of course it is foolishness and a stumbling block to them because they were blind and deceived. Here is the proof - 1 Corinthians 2:7-8
7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. The gospel was a mystery hidden from them, Herod, Pilate, the Pharissees, the Jews Acts 4:28 or they would not have crucified the Lord....
Then He mentions Rom 2:4 that the patience and kindness of God is intended to lead you to repentance but it is not irresistible because the following verse says in their stubborness and unrepentant heart, they were storing up wrath in the day of God's wrath. I am reformed and this is what we believe. 1 Cor 1:18, 1 Cor 2:14, the message of the cross is foolishness to the perishing (unregenerates who will naturally reject it because it is only understood by Spirit revelation) but it is the power of God unto salvation (salvation is solely the work and byproduct of the power of God) Until the Father draws the spiritually dead, No one can come to me John 6:44. The world will continue to reject the preaching of the gospel, the testimony of the kindness and goodness of God until dead sinners are confronted by the power of God. Saul is a good example of a dead, deceived and depraved sinner who resisted Jesus until Jesus revealed Himself and confronted Him, the result salvation.
Bottomline: It is a fallacy to use the Pharisees rejection and Rom 2:4 to prove his point that grace is resistible because unregenerates naturally resist God. Every unregenerate single person will resist the gospel initially until the power of God overcomes his resistance and draws him to salvation such as in the case of Saul. There is nothing offensive here because this is what we believe how God saves.
Sorry, I cant finish 2 hours of this video after 23 mins of listening. I don't think the rest will be any conclusive....
Joseph...were you a former Self Determinist before God showing you your election abd calling? Which branch? Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, etc....
@@ManassehJones Pentecostal church was my first church in 87. My first inclination those years were Arminianism due to human nature, rationalism. But as I started to study God's Word through the years, the Spirit opened my mind and understanding to Sovereign grace. Salvation is of the Lord from start to finish. I am what I am by the grace of God.
@@josephalvinalmedatv8 Glory to God. You now see how He used all of those experiences in your past to bring you to the Truth. Blessed be God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who called you by His grace.
Thanks bro. God bless you too. He called me into the ministry too 32 yrs now. Not really my first choice of career because He taught me persecution and the sufferings of Christ. But He showed me a beautiful lesson all to His glory.
@@josephalvinalmedatv8 God conforming you into the image of Christ is never joyous Brother, but grievous, but the end is the fruit of righteousness, His righteousness, Amen. Suffering the loss of ALL things, and counting them as dung, that Christ be your All in All. Glory to God.
How blessed it is to be in fellowship with the beloved of God.
Thanks for sharing. My testimony and witness is likewise a Sovereighn Divine Decree of God, from start to finish. Glory to God. Im going to follow you.
At 55:40, no... I realize that this is a popular assertion of men like Leighton Flowers, but it is demonstrably false.
Who are the ones drawn in John 12? Are these merely good Jews, the Old Testament/pre-crucifixion, true followers of Yahweh, who are already in a relationship with the Father, that He then draws to the Son (John 6:44)? After all, Jesus does draw a distinction between the true followers and the pretenders in John 8:44 who only thought that their Father was God. Well, it certainly could include them, but by no stretch is it only limited to them, see John 10:14-16, 11:51-52.
Well, Jesus said in John 6:45 that “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.”
Note the phrase “heard and learned.”
For some insight regarding “hearing and learning,” let’s observe John 12:29 - “So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it (the Father speaking from heaven) were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, “An angel has spoken to Him.”
Now, after the Father speaks from heaven confirming that He has glorified His Name, and Jesus said that this was for the sake of those standing around Him (John 12:30), everyone standing around Jesus heard something, but not everyone who heard was able to discern what it was that they heard, so there are obviously two groups of people here - those who can hear and learn from the Father, and those who cannot. The ability to hear and learn from the Father is not an ability that everyone has, and this is obvious since there were some that claimed that what they heard was merely thunder. It was a smaller group from the whole however that had been given ears to hear, that is, to hear AND learn, who actually heard the words of the Father to learn from Him.
So who is it that both “hears and learns?”
John 8:47 - “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”
John 10:26 - But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep
John 18:37 - “Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.”
Each of these phrases - “among my sheep,” “of God,” and “of the truth” - describes people before the Father gives them to Jesus.
1 - People are “among my sheep” or not, before they believe, because Jesus says that not being his sheep is why they “do not believe” (John 10:26).
2 - People are “of God” before they truly “[hear] the words of God,” because Jesus says that not being “of God” is why people don’t hear (John 8:47).
3 - People are “of the truth” before they “[listen] to my voice,” because Jesus says that being “of the truth” is why they listen (John 18:37).
Here's the point.
As we see in John 6:64-65 where Jesus gives an example of Judas as someone who would not believe, then He explains Judas’s unbelief by saying, “This is why [back in verse 44] I told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted him by the Father.” In other words, Judas did not believe because “no one can come to Me unless it is granted him from the Father” - implying that Judas was not granted this. Or, to use the words of verse 44, which Jesus is referring back to, the Father did not draw Judas. Being willing to come to Jesus is something God puts in a group of humans, which means that God did not choose a group of humans as His own because He saw in them a willingness to come to Jesus (or because He saw in them already a devotion to Yahweh). Whatever willingness humans have to come to Jesus is not the basis, but the result of belonging to the Father beforehand.
To sum up:
Jesus laid down His life for the sheep (John 10:14-16, cf. Ephesians 5:25-26). The Father gave us to Jesus (John 17:6). He drew us to Him (John 6:44), and we came to Him (John 6:37). He has kept us (John 17:12). And He will never cast us out (John 6:37). No one can snatch us out of His hand (John 10:28-29). And He will raise us from the dead at the last day (John 6:39). Before we belonged to Jesus, we belonged to the Father (John 17:6, 9). Before we listened to the truth, we belonged to the Father (John 8:47, 18:37). Before we believed, we belonged to the Father (John 10:26). Before we were drawn to the Son, we belonged to the Father (John 6:44, 65). We were His people before we believed, and that from both Jew and Gentile (Revelation 5:9).
At 30:35, you make the assertion that "God loves everybody." This is demonstrably false; if you claim to be a Christian who believes the Bible, this is not something that you can hold to:
Psalm 5:5-6 - The boastful shall not stand before Your eyes; You hate all who do iniquity. You destroy those who speak falsehood; the Lord abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit.
Psalm 11:5 - The LORD tests the righteous and the wicked, and the one who loves violence His soul hates.
Psalm 18:27 - For You save an afflicted people, but haughty eyes You abase.
Psalm 101:5 - Whoever secretly slanders his neighbor, him I will destroy; no one who has a haughty look and an arrogant heart will I endure.
Psalm 139:21-24 - Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You? I hate them with the utmost hatred; they have become my enemies. Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my anxious thoughts; and see if there be any hurtful way in me, and lead me in the everlasting way. *(Clearly, David felt that hating evil doers was synonymous with righteousness)*
Proverbs 6:16-19 - There are six things which the LORD hates, yes, seven which are an abomination to Him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that run rapidly to evil, a false witness who utters lies, and one who spreads strife among brothers. *(In this terrifying passage, we see that God not only hates the wicked deeds that men do, but He hates the men that commit those wicked deeds)*
*It has been said “love the sinner, hate the sin,” but that saying came from Gandhi, not God. In just the first 50 Psalms alone, 14 times we see God’s hatred and wrath for the sinner - God does not draw a line of separation between the unrepentant sinner and his sins.*
You notice that when you actually provide doctrinal truth and the verses there's crickets in the replies? That proves it's Truth. Irrefutable. Alls they can do is silently resist it because they cannot publically refute it. They run from the Light.
John 3:20-21
For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. [21] But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Bingo, the only proof for God loves every single person is not scripture but carnal logic and a religious spirit.
@@ManassehJonesNone of those passages you mishandled prove God does not love everyone.
In those passages you’ll find reference to the people Christ died for… SINNERS.
For God so LOVED the world that He gave His only begotten So.
While we were yet SINNERS Christ died for us.
Question: Did Christ love those whom
He died for?
Yes or no?
We’re those people sinners or righteous?
Did Christ come for the righteous or the sinner?
@@apilkey Does God love you? That's most important, not if He loves everyone else.
Jesus Christ came not but for "the lost Sheep of the house of Israel." Are you "Israel?" If you're not His Sheep, or from the house of Israel, He said Himself "I did not come for you."
@@ManassehJones Did Jesus love those He died for yes or no?
(I hear crickets chirping)
"I would never go john piper's church" sounds pretty humble from the anti-calvinist...smh
What does humility have to do with that?
At 1:21:14, no, not at all. Those who cannot hear are those who are not of God.
John 8:47 - “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”
People are “of God” before they truly “[hear] the words of God,” because Jesus says that not being “of God” is why people don’t hear.
At 1:22:12, why God hardens hearts? Sure, I'll give you the Biblical reason.
Though all men are totally depraved through the imputation of Adam’s sin (cf. Romans 5:12), “dead in their trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1-10, Colossians 2:8-15), and are unable to come to God apart from a supernatural working of the Holy Spirit (John 6:29, 37, 44, 65, Hebrews 12:2, Philippians 1:6), God’s continuous display of Himself to the reprobate mind brings about an ever increasing hostility towards God and anything associated with Him - this is precisely what we see with Pharaoh.
When God demonstrated Himself through many signs and miracles, in each instance, Pharaoh grew increasingly hostile towards Moses to the point that after the 9th plague, Pharaoh threatened to kill Moses should he ever come before him again (Exodus 10:28).
In abandoning the reprobate to their own fallen nature so that they may reap the unintended consequences that their own sinfulness produces, it is a means that God uses to direct the actions of sinful men through their own willful choices (Proverbs 16:9) so that they might be demonstrations of His wrath against sin and unrighteousness (Exodus 4:21-23).
I always have to chuckle at these anti-Calvinist channels that are based on a Westernized/Americanized sensibility gospel.
Chuckle chuckle. They have no choice in the matter according to Calvin-ism.
@@BloodBoughtMinistries There is ALWAYS a choice, unless regenerated. You will ALWAYS choose to reject God. So, my friend. There is a choice.
Lol 😂
@@JamesLee-pb6dl Sorry...I do not speak "LOL"??????
@@rogervincent2092 amen sir. Thank the sovereign God.