Calvinism Sermon: Irresistible Grace (Part 6 in series)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 фев 2017
- Dr. James White, of Alpha and Omega Ministries (aomin.org), taught Apologia Church during our series on the Doctrines of Grace/the Five Points of Calvinism. This is message #6 in the series. Dr. White explains the nature of the fall and the power of God in bringing the Elect to salvation.
Is salvation ultimately dependent upon man or God? Who receives the glory for salvation? If God wills to save someone from their sin, are they able to thwart His purposes and refuse His power to raise the spiritually dead?
For more, go to apologiaradio.com. You can partner with Apologia by signing-up for Apologia All-access in which you will get access to every TV program, every After Show, and Apologia Academy. Learn from some of the greatest modern theological minds and help Apologia defend the Biblical Faith around the world.
Sign-up at apologiaradio.com 
Развлечения
James White and RC Sproul are the guys who helped me understand Calvinism. After I understood reformed theology the bible started making so much more sense.
Daniel Omitted, since you claimed to understand Calvinism and it make more sense. Please give me your exposition on this verse by utilising the Calvinistic system. (Luk 19:10) For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.
Who are those Christ come to seek and to save? your answer must be Christ come to save only the elect based on your limited atonement theory. But this verse Luk19:10b says " ......to save that which was lost". basing on the same theory the lost must only be the "elect".
But that contradicts the Bible's affirmation, I quote "(Rom 3:9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; (Rom 3:10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
The Bible explicitly says "there is none righteous, no, not one" both jews and gentiles, that they are all under sin" meaning all human beings that ever lived or will lived on this earth. Your calvinism theory says the lost are the elect whom Christ come to seek and to save because Christ come to die only for their sins (particular atonement). Thus this doctrine of Calvinism has blatantly violated the word of God.
I have another verse for your exposition: " (Rom 4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness". Note rom4:5b "......that justified the ungodly....". based on calvinism the "ungodly" must only be the "elect" as only they could be saved.
Your calvinism teaching make no sense and it sounds ludicrous. Isn't it? Do you care to comment? Thank you Daniel.
@@93556108 what I think you are seeing is that we are all lost, none are good, without understanding, none seek God, etc. What I think u miss is that everyone is exactly so before the supernatural rebirth and the Text is speaking of non-Christians the unregenerate not regenerated, new creatures with new hearts/spirits who are indwelt and sealed by the Holy Spirit... thus the need for a Savior in the first place. Calvinist believe that all who were/are predestined and elected before the foundation of the world will without question come to faith(true saving faith) prior to or at any time before their death. If it weren't so then that would mean God is in fact NOT all knowing yet we know that He is. God can NOT learn because He knows all things...God doesn't even react to anything we do because that would imply that God is not only learning but that He reacted because He didn't know which way we were going until we did so (He's not in our corner hoping we do right and pick Him that makes Him even weaker and impotent. That is IF He was controlled by our actions.(That'd take Him out of control,sure He can sustain the universe but not mankind...I don't think so; and make the creature more powerful than The Almighty) Therefore He'd be obligated to do according to what we do or how we "make" Him do by our actions (exactly why suicide bombers and fanatics do what they do). That's a weak and small god, definitely not the True and Living God of the Bible. The story in Luke 19, I'm not sure what you are pointing out. All Calvinist would agree and affirm LK19:10; Christ did come to purchase His own, pay their ransom, debt, be their propitiation, atonement, to stand in their place. I may have missed ur question by miles but maybe not but here's something I'll leave with you
"perhaps the most common argument for those who hold to some form of an unlimited atonement is that Christ died for all without exception in a provisional sense. Christ died to provide salvation for all yet not to infallibly secure it for anyone in particular. He has died potentially for all, it is said, such that the potential exists for anyone to have the benefits of his sacrifice apply to him or her through repentance and faith. Very rarely is this provisional nature of the atonement argued based on the exegesis of scripture; rather, it is presented as a theological construct to explain texts that speak of Christ's death in universalistic terms. The argument usually takes the following form:
1. Scripture speaks of the death of Christ in universalistic terms; thus, Christ died for all without exception.
2.not everyone receives the saving benefits of Christ's death; some perish in hell.
3.therefore, Christ died for all in only a provisional or potential sense; the atonement is granted its efficacy by the decision of the sinner to repent and believe.
*the entirety of this argument depends on the unproven assumption in the first point, namely, that universalistic language must be interpreted to mean "all without exception."
To review, scripture teaches that Christ has actually not potentially, provisionally, or hypothetically, but actually accomplished the salvation of his people by virtue of his work on the cross. It is nearly tautologous to say that when scripture states that our substitute "bore our sins in his body on the tree"(1Pet2:24), it means he actually, NOT potentially, bore our sins in his body on the tree. When scripture says, "but he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed"(Isa53:5),it would be exegetically monstrous to conclude that he was only potentially pierced or potentially crushed that his chastisement brought only a potential peace or that his wounds brought only potential healing. That would be to artificially inject the concept of potentiality into texts that speak of efficacious, objective accomplishment. No, Christ was actually pierced, crushed, chastised, and wounded, and therefore he accomplished actual peace and actual healing. Scripture does not say, "by his wounds, you were made healable." It does not say, "by his wounds, you were put into a state in which you might be healed if you fulfill certain conditions that activate the hypothetically universal scope of Christ's wounds." The text simply says,"by his wounds you have been healed"(1Pet2:24). that is, Christ objective, substitutionary suffering and death actually accomplished the spiritual healing of those for whom he died those who, because of the intrinsic worth and efficacy of Christ's sacrifice, "not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved, and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved.".
"'God's saving purpose in the death of his Son was not a mere ineffectual wish, depending for its fulfillment on man's willingness to believe, so that for all God could do Christ might have died and none been saved at all... The Bible sees the cross as revealing God's power to save, not his impotence.Christ did not win a hypothetical salvation for hypothetical believers, a mere possibility of salvation for any who might possibly believe, but a real salvation for his own chosen people. His precious blood really does save us all; the intended effects of his self-offering do in fact follow, just because the cross was what it was. It's saving power does not depend on faith being added to it; it's saving power is such that Faith flows from it. The cross secured the full salvation of all for whom Christ died.'". A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth Biblical Doctrine; MacArthur, Mayhue pg548-549
@@Solomonsaysno No one is disputing that all men are sinners and they need to be born again before they could see the kingdom of God. The problem with Calvinism is that they erroneously taught God preordained before the foundation of the world, some (the elect) to eternal life and the rest (non-elect) to eternal hell which is a false doctrine unless you could verify it with some bible verses. You can’t deny it as a Calvinist that John Calvin actually taught double-predestination and its concept is contrary to what the bible taught.>>> At face value, it seems incredible to think that Christ died only for the elect. You couldn’t get a much clearer repudiation of this view than I John 2.2: “he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” Calvinism is forced into exegetical acrobatics in order to explain away the prima facie meaning of such scriptural statements. It seems to me that the questionable assumption of this argument is the presupposition that Christ’s death achieves our actual redemption rather than our potential redemption. True, Christ suffered what would have been the punishment for our sins, thereby meeting the demands of God’s justice. But that payment of our debt needs to be freely received by faith in order to accomplish our actual redemption. It is as if Christ has made a massive down-payment sufficient to pay for anyone’s sins, which we must then appropriate in order to become a beneficiary.>>> I quote; “ (Joh 3:17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. (Joh 3:18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God (Joh 3:19) And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil”. These verses stated that God love the world and not the elect only, and He didn’t sent His Son to condemn the world. The salvation concept is predicated on believing on the death, burial and resurrection of Christ but some loved darkness rather than the light and it signifies the free will of men on whether to accept or to reject the offer of the free gift of salvation (2Cor5:19-20)>>>Appreciate your comments on Calvin’s double-predestination theory.
@@93556108 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself." (Acts 2:39, ESV) see John 6:44,65 as well. U have to ask yourself who is the "our" in the Epistle? Is that the believers, the readers of the original letter, that one church or for several churches, unbelievers, etc? Those who God has called? This is something that should be done in every Epistle. When the religious leaders see the crowds following Jesus and say "the whole world has gone after him". Does that mean literally the entire world's population went after or was following Christ on foot that day? I'll get back with u later my friend busy busy right now. God bless.
@@Solomonsaysno You quoted: (Act 2:39) “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” The verse stated the promise was first made to the Jews and their descendants first then only God would call also all the gentiles for himself. The calling of the gentiles after the Jews was explicitly mentioned in Eph3:6 . This is about a corporate election of God for the gentiles. but it has nothing to do with the election of individuals as Calvinism falsely taught. >>> You quoted John6:44 which the Father draws only the Jews first then in John 12:32 Jesus affirmed after the cross He will draw ALL men to himself and not the elect only. This verse rebuke limited atonement and unconditional election. >>>But how about your comments on the world in these verses:John 1:29, 3:16; 1John2:2; 2Cor5:19>>>You haven’t responded to Calvin’s double-predestination yet and I am still waiting and this affirmation of Calvin maligned God’s character. God bless.
God has given Dr. White the gift of Grace. Dr. White is always very careful and steadfast in reminding us that it is God's Grace and God's Will, not our works and our will, that saves us and raises us from death to everlasting life through Jesus Christ.
Thank you James for a perfect exposition of Scripture.
@Hale Hafa Read 1 John
I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.
1 Corinthians 11:2 RSV-CI
Also read 2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught whether by word or by our epistle.
What do you do about the unwritten word of God passed as tradition?
Also know that you can't take a Bible and start a church because the bible came out of church through magisterium and tradition and not the other way round and you also need Sacred living Tradition to interpret the Scripture. Without it you can't get the right interpretation on many matters of huge significance.
when a person (family member, friend, co-worker, stranger, etc.) comes to embrace Christ, when he/she exhibits faith, what is our response, "Thank you Johnny for believing in Jesus"? No, we say "Thank you God", or "Thank God". Why do we respond like this? Because we know inherently that it was a work of God.
Well said
Amen
Thank God that HE IS SOVEREIGN.
As a kid, I was naturally arminian in my simplistic/ child-like theology. I thought man chose salvation from God.
It was God's good pleasure and purpose for man to freely determine to believe and repent or not (Josh. 24:19; Deut. 30:19; Isa. 55:6-7; John 7:17). Thats not arminianism, by the way. Thats Bible.
The Joshua and Deuteronomy references are already speaking to Gods people i.e. already chosen. The reference from John presupposes it like a litmus test.
@@AKRichardson, how can you be free when you are dead in your trespasses and sins. You are spiritually dead and incapable of making any decision for Christ or God. Satan controls your every move, he controls everything about your physical body. You stay dead until Christ makes you alive.
God chose Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David and JESUS. Jesus chose the disciples. He said "I chose you, you did not choose me." There is no mention of any of them making a "well thought out decision." When God chooses you there is no decision to make because your will is broken. God,s will is taking over and you are unbelievably happy and start following Him automatically because you want to. You quite simply start "walking" with a different attitude. Like Jesus, His will is your will
@@mrpetertait4082 The idea that spiritual death means being "incapable of making any decision for Christ or God" is the Calvinist assumption, of course, which I reject. To answer your question then, you can be free when being dead in trespasses because one's will is not lost, as assumes Calvinism. If Satan controls the sinner's every move, then it is the devil, not the sinner, that is sinning. You just described a puppet. This is the logical conclusion of that statement. Your other statements are all Calvinist assertions, that I reject. Thanks for responding though.
@@rupertmedford3901 You have missed the point of the first two references. The crowd, containing both unrighteous and righteous, was told to choose between God and the false gods. According to Calvinism, neither group could possibly choose other than what their nature allows, thus making the words meaningless. Only if one first assumes Reformed Theology's inability-of-man doctrine do these passages not affirm free-will. Let me ask: the burning of children to Molech by Israel, was this something God commanded or was it a "secret will" in his mind? Jer 32:35 "They built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech; which I didn't command them, neither did it come into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin."
Thank you, Dr. White.
It's God who wants His people to go to heaven to praise His glory and He Himself will ensure all of them reach the heaven..
None of the saints will be lost
scripture alone
Man, James White is the real hero... not only did he preach this Sunday, he also played and won the Super Bowl too..... James White is truly a ninja... lol
steven galvan, since James White is your real hero then you must be a Calvinist. Please do me a favour by giving me your exposition on this verse by utilising the Calvinistic system.
(Luk 19:10) For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. Who are those Christ come to seek and to save? your answer must be Christ come to save only the elect based on your limited atonement theory. But this verse Luk19:10b says " ......to save that which was lost". basing on the same theory the lost must only be the "elect".
But that contradicts the Bible's affirmation, I quote "(Rom 3:9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; (Rom 3:10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: The Bible explicitly says "there is none righteous, no, not one" both jews and gentiles, that they are all under sin" meaning all human beings that ever lived or will lived on this earth. Your calvinism theory says the lost are the elect whom Christ come to seek and to save because Christ come to die only for their sins (particular atonement). Thus this doctrine of Calvinism has blatantly violated the word of God.
I have another verse for your exposition: " (Rom 4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness". Note rom4:5b "......that justified the ungodly....". based on calvinism the "ungodly" must only be the "elect" as only they could be saved. Your calvinism teaching make no sense and it sounds ludicrous. Isn't it? Do you care to comment? Thank you Steven.
Truly, Grace, Peace, and LOVE in YESHUA, Brethren. Thank YHWH, Hallel-u-YAH, for you, Brother White, Alpha and Omega, and All my Brothers and Sisters at Apología who labor in YHWH YESHUA; Persevering in Magnifying The HOLY LORD CHRIST JESUS, to the Glory of GOD The HOLY FATHER, by the Power of The ALMIGHTY HOLY SPIRIT.
wow! I like you!!
Something I would like to see is a book that gives the best Calvinistic arguments and scriptures on one side, and on the other side the best arguments of the Armenians. This would help me anticipate how to proffer reasoning. If anyone knows of such a book can you let me know?
Read James White's book the Potters Freedom, and RC Sproul's book Chosen by God.
Thank you for uploading this.
I am a student of NOBTS. I know exactly know what you are talking about the unlimited atonement. I am a Calvinist and I want to thank you for shaping my understanding of my theology
charles ratcliff correct. Only men can shape the Calvinist theology. Not the Bible.
charles ratcliff, since you are a Calvinist appreciate if you could help me with your exposition on this verse by utilising the Calvinistic system. (Luk 19:10) For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost. Who are those Christ come to seek and to save? your answer must be Christ come to save only the elect based on your limited atonement theory. But this verse Luk19:10b says " ......to save that which was lost". basing on the same theory the lost must only be the "elect". Right?
But that contradicts the Bible's affirmation, I quote "(Rom 3:9) What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; (Rom 3:10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: The Bible explicitly says "there is none righteous, no, not one" both jews and gentiles, that they are all under sin" meaning all human beings that ever lived or will lived on this earth. Your calvinism theory says the lost are the elect whom Christ come to seek and to save because Christ come to die only for their sins (particular atonement). Thus this doctrine of Calvinism has blatantly violated the word of God.
I have another verse for your exposition: " (Rom 4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness". Note rom4:5b "......that justified the ungodly....". based on calvinism the "ungodly" must only be the "elect" as only they could be saved. Your calvinism teaching make no sense and it sounds ludicrous. Isn't it? Do you care to comment? Thank you Charles.
Hi Charles. It's important to remember there is no such thing as unlimited atonement. The Reformed view limits the application. That is, the atonement was for Christ's elect only, and it was completely effective. The Arminian view is that it was for all men alike. But the effect is limited in that it doesn't go all the way. Man must add to the atonement his autonomous faith to make the atonement effective. Bearing Romans 8 in mind, as with Ephesians 2, and Christ's words on the cross, I'll take my stand with the Reformed view. Christ said, "it is finished." Not "it is begun." There are a whole host of other reasons to believe in limited atonement,.such as.double jeopardy of the sinner. The atonement of Christ is depicted in the hilasterion (sp?) of the Temple as well.
Amen.
Anybody put Sovereignty and Holiness before 🌷 ?
Thankyou guys for your love of scripture and really helping me to work out what I believe, I am still on the journey, but will be investigating more, now I will be looking at what Dr Leighton Flowers has to say. I gotta say I am agree with a lot of what you say, but cant get past Limited Atonement ( like I say still on the journey :))
Jeremiah 19:5 says, “They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal-something I did NOT COMMAND or mention, nor did it enter my mind.” 2nd Peter 3:9 says, “The Lord is…not willing that ANY should perish but that ALL should come to repentance.” and yet, it also has Jesus saying, "Broad is the road that leads to destruction (hell) and many are on it, but straight and narrow is the road that leads to life (Heaven) and few ever find it." So, while God is not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance and be saved, most are not. This is irrefutable proof that God’s will is NOT always being done. God clearly says, He did NOT command the people to burn their children to Baal.
how can you know you are one of the elected?
If you've ever been filled with the Holy Spirit and you know who Jesus is. It happened to me during a suicide attempt WHILE I WAS AN ATHEIST !!!
@@rudyferrell i have felt the holy spurit in profound ways but some of them were in the mormon church.ive had a difficult time leaving the mormon church because of those profound experiences.any thoughts or advice?
@@joanlantis4497 my only advice is to read the Bible for yourself and never trust completely on anyone else's interpretation of it. The answers are there, ask God to reveal them to you.
Who knows
If we are justified by faith alone, as RC SPROUL argued then where do you fit scripture verses such as James 2:14-24?
And Revelation 19:8?
And does it then also mean that Phinehas was justified by execution alone? according to his actions in Numbers 25 and repeated in Ps 107; Then Phinehas stood up and interposed, and the plague was stayed. And that has been reckoned to him as righteousness from generation to generation for ever.
Psalms 106:30-31 RSV-CI?
Calvinism is in error and so is protestantism but it's almost impossible to convince anyone except if the Holy Spirit leads someone to the truth. But in all this we love you our separated brethren. God bless you all
Why does God allow sincere Christians to continue believing in Calvinism? Why doesn't he correct them?
I generally do not agree with White, but I will agree with him on his point at 18:28 - "we are completely dependent upon God's saving grace". What a shame that syntax and terminology confuses so many about the free gift of salvation to WHOSOEVER will (Rev. 22:17). Are you saved today? You are elected to salvation. Not saved today with zero interest in becoming a child of God? You are elected to Hell. I don't need Greek or "better" manuscripts like Wescott & Hort to tell me what I John 2:2 states in my King James when it says Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the WHOLE world. Whole means the whole enchilada, not just the parts that were foreordained to be included. Free will? Oh yes. Like White rightly says...people resist the grace of God more often than not!
It's that simple.
Agree 100% with ur statement. doesn't "...quit you like men" sound completely odd and foreign to our "vulgar tongue" I'm just messing with you. God bless.
Have you been to Botswana?
One of the problems we are facing is - we do not sing hymns of the faith enough anymore.
Why wasn't the sermon on Limited Atonement uploaded?
It's on Apologia Radio's Facebook page. We left for a week for our church-planting trip and weren't able to upload it to RUclips yet. It'll be up on RUclips this week. For now, go to Apologia Radio's Facebook page. :)
Which scriptures refute the doctrine of Limited Atonement?
Ben, I have questions about limited atonement too, just so you know I'm not trying to attack you, but I'm sorry, I don't understand how your verses "absolutely" refute limited atonement. As I understand the doctrine, right or wrong, limited atonement has to do with being saved, not being resurrected.
I see what you mean, though I get the impression that he's being clumsy with his words there, also, not having yet read Geisler's statement I can't rule out that James might have been quoting. Thank you for replying.
1 Tim. 2:4
I understand predestination and election are in the scriptures. But my question is. What do we do with passages like
1 Timothy 2:3-4
3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Or
2 Peter 3:9 KJV - The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Trevor Cunningham the issue in Peter is that if God has an elect few that HE decides go to heaven... what on earth is he waiting for? Why not just end the world now? It’s not like anybody else can choose to come into the faith, it was all predestined by God. And if he does wish that all be saved, can’t he just elect everyone into heaven? And if not, why can’t he? He is God after all
Trevor Cunningham and what about the Great Commision; literally Jesus’ greatest command is to go into all the WORLD (not a select group of people), baptizing then in the name of the father, son, and Holy Spirit... if God elects people... what’s the point? He’ll save whoever without our intervention, right?
Trevor Cunningham
thank you for your response! I always find it nice to have conversation from both the Calvinist and Arminian sides. Whatever the belief is, I don’t think it is a heaven or hell issue, and that all who believe in him will be saved, whether through being elected prior, or through predestination. Thank you for clearing some things up for me. God Bless you!!
Steven Basua you’re better off not asking Calvinists. They will twist the simplest scriptures. They don’t even know if they are the elect!
RC Sproul had an excellent discussion of these verses. Paul is writing to Timothy about the elect. Peter is writing to the church. In both cases, the "us" and the "all" refer to the elect. God wants US to come to repentance and faith, which we elect shall do as the gift of repentance and faith is given to US, in God's time and purpose. Neither Peter nor Paul are writing to, or concerning, general humanity in either of those cases. Acts 11:18 describes how the church in Antioch, after Peter tells what happened, realized that God had granted repentance to the Gentiles. 2 Tim 2:25 Timothy here acknowledged that it is God who gives repentance, and He doesn't grant it to all men (else these would be moot statements).
During 1689 the London Baptists attempted to correct the errors of infant baptism in the Westminster Confession of Faith, but failed to correct other errors in the document. The 1689 LBCF also claims the 10 commandments, re-labeled as "the moral law" (a term not found in scripture) were given to Adam before the fall, no matter what we find in Exodus 34:28, and Deuteronomy 5:1-3. In Galatians chapter 3 the Apostle Paul reveals that the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made. In Matthew chapter 5 Christ compares the higher standard of the New Covenant to the Old Covenant, through the words "But I say...". There is a clear contrast between "the ministry of death engraved on stones" and the New Covenant in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8. In Galatians 4:24-31 Paul compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage". We are not come to "the mountain that burns with fire" (Sinai), but to the New Covenant of Mount Sion, in Hebrews 12:18-24. The 1689 LBCF also claims were are under the 4th commandment, no matter what we find in Colossians 2:16-17, and the fact that Sunday is the first day of the week. Based on the book "The Trail of Blood" by J.M. Carroll, true "Baptists" have never been "Reformed". The doctrine now known as "Calvinism" started out as Augustine's attempt to explain how the infants of believers could become the "elect" through infant baptism. Since the child had not come to faith, it must be based on the will of another. Does regeneration precede faith in Ephesians 1:13? Do some research on what the Early Church Fathers before Augustine believed about free will. Watch the RUclips videos "The New Covenant" by Bob George, and "New Covenant Theology Made Simple" by David H.J. Gay.
This fellow needs a meeing with a Biblical counselor
IMMEDIATE HOLY SPIRIT REGENERATION WITHOUT GOSPEL MEANS!
i believe in the bible God's sovereignty dictates we choose and he controls the destiny of our choices. since god has fore knowledge and therefore knows those he has and will save before he created creation which is why the bible contains places where god reveals the destiny of a choice made one way or another. i do not believe in a full Armenian view because there is a tension of both. god can and does transform us through faith. we dont change because we can but we believe god can change us. faith is the answer to this. god does also do things as he wills regardless of what man will do but that always seems very situational according to a set destiny for choices made.
I love the absolute sovereignty of God but Mr Piper, don't you think it would honor God. more if we would leave out calvin. Let God be true but every man a liar. God receives ALL the Glory and He will not share HIS glory with another
This is not John Piper here. But to answer your question, I can’t speak for all Calvinists but I know that myself and most others that I know don’t ascribe to Calvinism just because John Calvin wrote about it. I’m sure he would be appalled that we named the truths after him. But it’s kind of stuck now because people are labeling an entire theological system after it. There are lots of things I don’t agree with Calvin on. I wouldn’t mind only ever calling them the doctrines of grace. But it’s hard to get everyone on board for that.
I listened to the entire talk by White and he consistently talks about "the elect" and even refers to Mormons who are among those "elect", yet he correctly states that NONE of the "elect" can take any credit whatsoever for their salvation. Mormonism is the very antithesis of salvation by grace. No wonder people are confused about this issue! Not once did White ever attempt, much less answer, the obvious question of HOW the elect are to know this fact. Maybe it's not even necessary for them TO know...after all, they're the "elect"! To state that a group that believes that Jesus was the product of sex in heaven between Elohim and one of his goddess wives (plural) has no part in any salvation my King James Bible knows anything about. Since White loves to denigrate and chop up the AV, is it any wonder he would make allowance for cultists to gain heaven without their knowledge or consent? Using his logic, there must be Buddhist, Jehovah's Witness, and Atheist "elect" - they just don't know it yet. James White is a very intelligent person, but why ANYONE would be promote Calvinism, TULIP or otherwise, is foreign to common sense and the clear reading of the Word of God. "Performance based salvation" is Arminianism, not Bible Christianity. That's the problem with Calvinists...if you're not one of "them", you by default MUST be Arminian. To this I say - pass the bread, the BALONEY has already been around!
Don't believe White - don't believe me...believe the Word of God in Romans 10:9 - 13 and you'll have the proper perspective on GOD's verdict on what constitutes salvation.
Revelation 22:17 shuts down Calvinism far better than I can - I will trust the revealed and guaranteed words of God.
Ephesians 2: 8-9 so good! grace alone! Yes I can see how redemption is before faith, but still cant see limited atonement - what am I missing? :). I am not a synergist! Its all Him!
I look at Christ for limited atonement. Look what he says in John 2:24-25. Of course read all of John 2 to get context of what Jesus was saying. John 3 is powerful for limiting to a believer has eternal life through Jesus Christ.
And of course John 6 is so powerful for limited atonement. John 6:63. The Spirit gives life; flesh is no help. No one can come to Christ unless granted by God. God limits it his own way.
Consider that it is God who decides to whom He will give mercy to. And what does this mercy look like in those who receive it? It is their being born again, or from above, as the Greek can render it. This is stated by Jesus in John 3:3 and corroborated in John 1:13. The idea of being born was used intentionally by Jesus to signify our inability to effect our own salvation or entry into the kingdom of God; since, in our birth, we play no part, and the decision and the glory are God's alone. Consider, also, Romans 9:22-24, wherein Paul declares that God has made some unto one destiny and some unto another. And He is completely just in so doing, for, as the potter has authority over the clay, to make one vessel for glory and another for dishonorable use, so God has authority over His creation to make the vessels and choose how they will be used and where they will end up. I hope this at least clears up some difficulties, if it doesn't actually answer your question.
Question for all those who accept predestination: do you ever wonder whether or not YOU are saved?
HAVE you ever?
If not, why not?
JMUDoc John MacArthur says you can know by seeing the proof of the Holy Spirits work In you. In other words you can’t know unless you do works to prove it.
Even so, John Piper says you can never truly know. Period.
“No Christian can be sure he is a true believer, hence there is an ongoing need to be dedicated to the Lord and deny ourselves so that we might make it”
Utter garbage.
In the sixteenth century the Roman Catholic Council of Trent declared that believers who said they could know they were elect were guilty of rash presumption:
“No one, moreover, so long as he is in this mortal life, ought so far to presume as regards the secret mystery of divine predestination, as to determine for certain that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate”
If you pay close attention you will find that Calvinists and Catholics have a lot in common.
Dr. Leighton Flowers has the best, biblical refutation of Calvinism in modern times. Apologia Studios and Jeff Durbin put out some stellar vids, but they drop the ball hard in this arena. Would be pleased to see a one-on-one with Jeff and Leighton.
I thought you get born again by water and spirit myself.
perhaps it all comes down to what is human will. Are we truely free and does this limit God's sovereignity? Can make humans with a free will, and yet still be sovereign? It seems to me unless we are truely free, we are not responsible. Adam was truely free to be disobedient, otherwise how can he be free to love. As a consequence of Adam's free will, he was held responsible for his disobediance. If he was not truely free then he is not responsible. I agree we are born fallen and slaves to sin, dead to Christ. It is the Holy Spirit's redemptive action that allows us to be quickened and become alive to Christ as per Ephesians 2: 8. It is his grace that works in us to enable us to make a decision for Christ. Am I elected, predestined, called? yes, yes, yes. Is my will involved, yes. I rely on the grace and faith of God to allow me to believe ( an exercise of my will) Does this nullify the sovereignity and work of God, can I boast in my Faith? not according to Ephesians 2. Instead I realise how helpless I was in the deadness of my sin and am in awe of God's grace. There are repeated warnings throughout the scriptures re hardening of our hearts. Exaltation to maintain our faith, ( Hebrews is big on this) Obviously it is possible once knowing the amazing grace of God and tasting what it is to be part of the elect, that you can trample on the blood of Christ. So I dont think once saved always saved. Do I have a confidence of the saving grace of God, most certainly, I have been reconciled to Christ, I dont in and out of saving grace, I have been sealed with the promise of the Holy Spirit. Can I actively and wilfully reject Christ? I am sure I can, I have a friend who was a Pastor, who on finding out he had cancer, rejected Christ, said he wanted an atheist funeral, with no mention of God, blamed God for his cancer, then planned his own death. I am not God, but I am sure that God would not force him into heaven against his (sadly mistaken) will! I hope I am wrong! It is the finished work of Christ that is my confidence, The Atonement was complete for all of humanity for all time. A partial atonement does not give me a confidence of salvation. Perhaps I am not really one of the elect? How can I be confident if some sin is not dealt with, is it mine ? But unlimited atonement means I can be confident that my sin has been dealt with. 1 Corinth 18 the context is ALL people, not some
Irresistible grace is not biblical.
Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
You just refuted yourself there bud. They resist because they are "uncircumcised at heart" they haven't been reborn. But to he who is reborn does not resist the Holy Spirit.
@HillDueceua This compliments Calvinism. It's IMPOSSIBLE to fall away after being "sealed" with the holy spirit, read futher in Hebrews. You've interpreted this verse to say you can fall away. Proper exegesis would require you include the complimentary scripture of John 7 and 10, Ephesians 1, several examples brother.
@HillDueceua It's commonplace for an author to repeat on a point, but I wholeheartily believe that with point in question, you've misconstrued the authors intent.
"To reject Christ's sacrifice is to go on sinning willfully by remaining in the Old Testament sacrificial system" is the conclusion i will use and defend.
-Proper Exegesis would also require examining the audience in question, and purpose of the material. The author of Hebrews makes it clear to do away with the old sacrificial system. In verse 18 it says, "Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.." He is telling the reader that when someone is forgiven, there's no longer a need for another offering as in the Old Testament type offerings.
- To reject Christ's sacrifice is to go on sinning willfully by remaining in the Old Testament sacrificial system. For those who do that, there is no longer sacrifice remaining for sin because for them Christ is not a sacrifice.
-Therefore, when the writer in Hebrews 10:26 says "For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins," he is explaining about those who had received the knowledge of the truth but were rejecting it--not that they were saved and lost their salvation.
- To receive the knowledge of the truth does not mean they are saved, It simply means they received the knowledge of the truth of who Jesus was and what he did as well as the truth that "it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins" (Hebrews 10:4), and that God does not take pleasure in "whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sins" (Hebrews 10:6).
- The writer wants them to trust in the only sacrifice for sins, which is Jesus' sacrifice on the cross, and not return to the unsaving old sacrificial system.
Also, thank you for using scripture and not resulting in ad hominem, some of the comments on here are unbearibly rude and without any productivity. I'm sure you're a fine brother in the Lord!
Acts 1:8 simplified my life purposes . Jesus keeps the gospel simple to do so the kids
Can get their cookies off the lowest shelf.
Of course that was Jesus Christ - not john Calvin . Same initials .
Two vastly different people .
Do
Not complicate the gospel . And if you will not take heed to the simple gospel , then shut your mouth . And figure your own salvation. Out for yourself. As the scriptures say - work out your own salvation. With fear and trembling.
2 corinthians 2:12-17 .
Or else shut your mouth.
Galatians 6:9!or shut up .
1 john 4:7&8 or shut up .
God has given Dr. White the gift of Grace. Dr. White is always very careful and steadfast in reminding us that it is God's Grace and God's Will, not our works and our will, that saves us and raises us from death to everlasting life through Jesus Christ.
PERFECT!